Rock catchers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Who has gone 30K on just filter changes and makeup oil like DB and had sufficient TBN left over?
You are not suggesting the oil filter impacts the TBN in anyway, are you?


DBMaster already posted his data.

Thats how it works.

Its ability to scrub out 2-20 in the bypass portion preserves TBN - not as well as a true bypass, but well enough for a 30K run in an auto applications.
 
Originally Posted By: AuthorEditor
If you're getting serious about filtration go to a bypass system in addition to the primary, but IMHO what is the point when the vehicle will have rotted away around the beautifully running engine? Personally, I am not into car collecting or just looking at my vehicles--I use them for various purposes and they wear out. I have yet to ever wear out an engine before replacement of the vehicle or junking was required due to an accumulation of wear and tear in other areas that made the vehicle not worth repairing any more. If I was running a big expensive tractor trailer rig I might think differently.


"Forever engines" holding up around rotting cars is a myth this place continues to proffer even when guys on this site lose engines.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4058889/Re:_5.3_freshly_rebuilt???#Post4058889

Especially trucks.
 
Quote:
"Forever engines" holding up around rotting cars is a myth this place continues to proffer

Not a myth in my decades of vehicle ownership. Never retired a vehicle due to engine problems. That thread you reference seems to me to be more about particular engines that are prone to major problems that are unrelated to oil and filter choices. My main point is that if you use an oil specced for your vehicle and a decent filter and change at the recommended intervals you will find that most modern vehicle engines will outlast the rest of the vehicle.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: AuthorEditor
Quote:
"Forever engines" holding up around rotting cars is a myth this place continues to proffer

Not a myth in my decades of vehicle ownership. Never retired a vehicle due to engine problems.


Maybe you haven't - but plenty of other people have.

Guys here like the poster with the rebuilt 5.3 chevy at 95K .

Just because it hast happened to you - doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Guys that tow a lot with gas trucks start losing them at 10 years around 100K.
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Who has gone 30K on just filter changes and makeup oil like DB and had sufficient TBN left over?
You are not suggesting the oil filter impacts the TBN in anyway, are you?
DBMaster already posted his data. Thats how it works. Its ability to scrub out 2-20 in the bypass portion preserves TBN - not as well as a true bypass, but well enough for a 30K run in an auto applications.
I agree that it is a good UOA, however, without contrasting data (like a 30K OCI with full flow filters changed at the exact same intervals) it hardly proves (or disproves) the MGs filter impacted the TBN in any appreciable way. Wear metals are not what depletes the TBN.
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Who has gone 30K on just filter changes and makeup oil like DB and had sufficient TBN left over?
You are not suggesting the oil filter impacts the TBN in anyway, are you?
DBMaster already posted his data. Thats how it works. Its ability to scrub out 2-20 in the bypass portion preserves TBN - not as well as a true bypass, but well enough for a 30K run in an auto applications.
I agree that it is a good UOA, however, without contrasting data (like a 30K OCI with full flow filters changed at the exact same intervals) it hardly proves (or disproves) the MGs filter impacted the TBN in any appreciable way. Wear metals are not what depletes the TBN.

Combustion, heat, and water all contribute to the breakdown of additives which hinder the oils ability to control acid.
It's not unreasonable to imagine that bypass filtration or even this this dual bypass mg filter could help control these contributing factors. The question would be, is the bypass section capable of obtaining much moisture. The fine filtering has to help control combustion residue and wear which in turn would help control heat. Regular highway use would control moisture even if the bypass didn't.
I'm interested in these for possibly my next remote atf filter. As far as motor oil, ill just change my oil more and use a $3 or $4 filter everytime.
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: AuthorEditor
Quote:
"Forever engines" holding up around rotting cars is a myth this place continues to proffer

Not a myth in my decades of vehicle ownership. Never retired a vehicle due to engine problems.


Maybe you haven't - but plenty of other people have.

Guys here like the poster with the rebuilt 5.3 chevy at 95K .

Just because it hast happened to you - doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Guys that tow a lot with gas trucks start losing them at 10 years around 100K.
I had a brand new car have an engine failure when it was a year and a half old , Failures happen . Towing puts a strain on the engine but then how do the people operate the vehicle when towing. Most people tow pedal to the metal and going up hills it's wot all the way.
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Who has gone 30K on just filter changes and makeup oil like DB and had sufficient TBN left over?
You are not suggesting the oil filter impacts the TBN in anyway, are you?
All the material captured in the filters media seem to have to act as a catalyst bed.
 
I don't believe in the "car falling apart around the engine" nonsense. We never retired a worn out car with a still running engine, it was always a car in decent shape with a blown engine that was too expensive to bother fixing or replacing. Just go to a junkyard. Rows upon rows of cars in great shape with blown engines. Look at Craigslist. Plenty of sellers with cars in good shape with blown engines (or so they claim).
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Who has gone 30K on just filter changes and makeup oil like DB and had sufficient TBN left over?
You are not suggesting the oil filter impacts the TBN in anyway, are you?
DBMaster already posted his data. Thats how it works. Its ability to scrub out 2-20 in the bypass portion preserves TBN - not as well as a true bypass, but well enough for a 30K run in an auto applications.
I agree that it is a good UOA, however, without contrasting data (like a 30K OCI with full flow filters changed at the exact same intervals) it hardly proves (or disproves) the MGs filter impacted the TBN in any appreciable way. Wear metals are not what depletes the TBN.


Net net is that - 2 stage filtration > single stage filtration.

That UOA and mileage/ filter run has not been duplicated by anyone with ANY single stage filter here on BITOG.

I never said it was just "wear metal"- that depleted TBN.

All the flotsam and jetsam floating around tends to agglomerate over time soot is prime example of how these chains attract and grow - plus heat water and acid floating around in your oil combine to deplete TBN not just metal.


A bypass any bypass doesnt scrub it all out, but a significant enough of it to extend TBN by a notable amount.

Thats how DB got a serviceable 30K out of essentially the same sump

Whats " new" and that isn't even really new is that its fairly rare to see the 2 stages in one convenient spin on filter for passenger auto applications.

Baldwin strata pour comes to mind, as being a bigger better version of the same thing.

If I could buy a baldwin 2 stage for my car I would buy that over microgreen.

Still trying to figure out who makes the thing......anybody?

UD
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
That UOA and mileage/ filter run has not been duplicated by anyone with ANY single stage filter here on BITOG.
I do not recall anyone even attempting this much less changing filters and topping off every 10K. So again, nothing has been proven or disproven--but it is a good run and UOA. With that said, I do not think it is farfetched to believe that had I changed my filter and topped off every 10K in my old FX4 that I could have duplicated this feat. I had a TBN of 2.9 at 17K with only 0.5 QT of makeup oil. With two filter changes (which would need 1 QT total) and 1 QT of makeup oil, I would bet a steak dinner I would still have TBN left at 30K. But alas, completely academic at this point.
 
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
That UOA and mileage/ filter run has not been duplicated by anyone with ANY single stage filter here on BITOG.
I do not recall anyone even attempting this much less changing filters and topping off every 10K. So again, nothing has been proven or disproven--but it is a good run and UOA. With that said, I do not think it is farfetched to believe that had I changed my filter and topped off every 10K in my old FX4 that I could have duplicated this feat. I had a TBN of 2.9 at 17K with only 0.5 QT of makeup oil. With two filter changes (which would need 1 QT total) and 1 QT of makeup oil, I would bet a steak dinner I would still have TBN left at 30K. But alas, completely academic at this point.


DB proved it works as claimed with UOA's submitted to BITOGS pet lab.

It performs exactly as they claim with third party test backing it up.

It is your speculation that is unproven.

You may be right but until you actually prove it, its your theory.



UD
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: 2015_PSD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
That UOA and mileage/ filter run has not been duplicated by anyone with ANY single stage filter here on BITOG.
I do not recall anyone even attempting this much less changing filters and topping off every 10K. So again, nothing has been proven or disproven--but it is a good run and UOA. With that said, I do not think it is farfetched to believe that had I changed my filter and topped off every 10K in my old FX4 that I could have duplicated this feat. I had a TBN of 2.9 at 17K with only 0.5 QT of makeup oil. With two filter changes (which would need 1 QT total) and 1 QT of makeup oil, I would bet a steak dinner I would still have TBN left at 30K. But alas, completely academic at this point.


DB proved it works as claimed with UOA's submitted to BITOGS pet lab.

It performs exactly as they claim with third party test backing it up.

It is your speculation that is unproven.

You may be right but until you actually prove it, its your theory.
Again, nothing has been proven or disproven and it is times like this that I wish I still had my old FX4. However, I am a "put my money where my mouth is" kind of guy. If DB Master is willing I will pay for a full oil change including Fram Ultra filters and pay for the UOA as a comparison test.
 
Originally Posted By: Plawan
Lol that's sorta funny. If it can remove particles 2 microns in size it certainly can have at least a nominal micron rating of 2. It's 1 filter with 2 ways of filtering. So even if the full flow media can't filter to 2 microns(which it most likely can to some extent) the 2 in 1 filter is still capable of having a mcron rating of 2.


Sure, Microgreen can tout the 2 micron filtering, but what efficiency rating at 2 microns? Even high efficiency regular spin-on filters will catch some 2 micron particles. The Ultra is said (by Motorking) to be 80% @ 5 microns, so it's probably at least 30~40% at 2 microns.

Someone emailed Purolator years ago about the PureOne (rated at 99% @ 20 microns back then), and the following data was sent by Purolator on the efficiency at other particle sizes.

Thread Link a>

Even though they didn't show a 2 micron data point, the filter would still catch a fair amount of 2 micron particles (probably around 20~30%).

Microns -- Efficiency
---------------------
5 -- 51.3%
10 -- 92.8%
15 -- 99.20%
20 -- 99.9%
25 -- 100%
30 -- 100%
40 -- 100%
 
3 filters 30K miles - 3 passed UOA's - thats proof.

If we do the same thing with ultras is it proof or is it not?

Ill split the cost with you.






UD
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
MG's bypass scrub preserves the TBN's effective life by keeping the contaminants in the 2-20 range in filter and out of the oil.

Thats why you can keep the same oil and it tests fine for so long.


If a regular spin-on filters at 99+% @ 20 microns (and 80% @ 5 microns), then I would think it could "scrub" the oil just as well and keep the oil alive just as long.

It would be interesting if the same test was done, with the same oil and same car with something like the Ultra, but change the filter every 10K miles (like MicroGreen suggests for their filter and to get the same make-up oil) and see if there was any difference in the UOA.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
MG's bypass scrub preserves the TBN's effective life by keeping the contaminants in the 2-20 range in filter and out of the oil.

Thats why you can keep the same oil and it tests fine for so long.


If a regular spin-on filters at 99+% @ 20 microns (and 80% @ 5 microns), then I would think it could "scrub" the oil just as well and keep the oil alive just as long.

It would be interesting if the same test was done, with the same oil and same car with something like the Ultra, but change the filter every 10K miles like MicroGreen suggests (or go one step farther and change filter only at 15K) and see if there was any difference in the UOA.



MG's teflon disk "bypass" looks nearly impenetrable to my eye.

Id like to see what they were issued patents for.

Love to see somebody perform a 30K mile filter and makeup test on ultras.

UD
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
MG's bypass scrub preserves the TBN's effective life by keeping the contaminants in the 2-20 range in filter and out of the oil.

Thats why you can keep the same oil and it tests fine for so long.


If a regular spin-on filters at 99+% @ 20 microns (and 80% @ 5 microns), then I would think it could "scrub" the oil just as well and keep the oil alive just as long.

It would be interesting if the same test was done, with the same oil and same car with something like the Ultra, but change the filter every 10K miles (like MicroGreen suggests for their filter and to get the same make-up oil) and see if there was any difference in the UOA.
I just offered to fund just such an endeavor.
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
3 filters 30K miles - 3 passed UOA's - thats proof.

If we do the same thing with ultras is it proof or is it not?

Ill split the cost with you. UD
it will not be a controlled experiment that much is certain. It would take dozens if not a hundred test to achieve some sort of standard. However in light of things it would just be nice to see if there was a difference. Just waiting to see if DB Master wants to do such a thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

fantastic
L14476, PL14476, & PBL14476 Purolator Classic, One, & Boss Oil Filter Specification Sheets
Replies
7
Views
2K
fantastic
redhat
What interval would you change your ATF filter if drain + fill ATF regularly
Replies
13
Views
883
nascarnation
O
My new favourite thing: k&n air filter spray
Replies
15
Views
2K
ZeeOSix
S
RockAuto oil filters
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
John105
R
Deer and other animals continuously ramming my car
2 3
Replies
40
Views
946
ARCOgraphite
Back
Top