Fram? You decide

[Oregoonian]

Originally Posted By: car51
FRAM ULTRA is NOT put together "cheaply" either. Get your facts right
+
+1....not all Frams are junk. Both the ULTRA and the Tough Guard are quality, and efficient filters designed for longer OCI's (15K and 7/5K). Most of the other Frams are good for 5K or under.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ Tough Guard is rated to 10K miles.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

I run Tough Guard 12K (two 6K OCIs). It has better flow than the more restrictive Ultra.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
I run Tough Guard 12K (two 6K OCIs). It has better flow than the more restrictive Ultra.


Highly doubt the Ultra is more restrictive than the Tough Guard. Ultra is full synthetic media which flows better than cellulose blend. Where did you come up with the notion the TG flows better?

 

[SilverC6]

Nothing wrong with FRAM Ultra other than the price for most applications.

I use them from time to time on the Camry.

I wouldn't use FRAM Ultra on any Euro cartridge application.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
I run Tough Guard 12K (two 6K OCIs). It has better flow than the more restrictive Ultra.


Highly doubt the Ultra is more restrictive than the Tough Guard. Ultra is full synthetic media which flows better than cellulose blend. Where did you come up with the notion the TG flows better?


I came up with it here at BITOG. Several mentions of concern / interest / opinions on Ultra's flow rate, in comparison to filters like Tough Guard, Wix, Napa Gold.....etc. It's part of the multiple reasons why it costs more and considered a better filter. Better filters attract / capture more. There's usually always a trade-off with filters having higher flow rates.

Works similar with furnace filters too. Pay more and it will very likely capture more. But the trade-off is the air force coming out your heat vents will a wee-bit less forceful.

I prefer flow over my unneeded high-end filtering. My engine and furnace intakes are kept pretty clean and I need-not restrictive filtering.

Do a search on old Ultra discussions here. I'm not going to dig for you.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
I run Tough Guard 12K (two 6K OCIs). It has better flow than the more restrictive Ultra.


Highly doubt the Ultra is more restrictive than the Tough Guard. Ultra is full synthetic media which flows better than cellulose blend. Where did you come up with the notion the TG flows better?


I came up with it here at BITOG. Several mentions of concern / interest / opinions on Ultra's flow rate, in comparison to filters like Tough Guard, Wix, Napa Gold.....etc. It's part of the multiple reasons why it costs more and considered a better filter. Better filters attract / capture more. There's usually always a trade-off with filters having higher flow rates.

Works similar with furnace filters too. Pay more and it will very likely capture more. But the trade-off is the air force coming out your heat vents will a wee-bit less forceful.

I prefer flow over my unneeded high-end filtering. My engine and furnace intakes are kept pretty clean and I need-not restrictive filtering.

Do a search on old Ultra discussions here. I'm not going to dig for you.


Since you don't hang out in this forum much, I guess you never saw the discussion linked below. All the uninformed members who "claim" the Ultra is restrictive have no real info to back it up, just like the people who claimed PureOne filters were restrictive to flow (because they were efficient) were also wrong.

Fact is, you can have very good filtering efficiency and very good flow at the same time. That's what full synthetic media gives you.

Read this thread from this point forward: LINK TO ULTRA FLOW INFO

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: wemay
5 year old anecdotal video hardly condemns the brand. Sorry.


Five years ago Fram was considered the worst filter in the world here at BITOG. Not so much lately.