Chevron Article on Bypass Systems

Status
Not open for further replies.
Since Nat. gas burns cleaner, might there be different results with trucks burning diesel?? Wish they had tested diesel trucks.
 
This test then only applies to NG style diesel engines.

And do as lonerider suggested, test the bypass system with real diesel fuel.

Then add gasoline/petrol, too.
 
Originally Posted By: loneryder
Since Nat. gas burns cleaner, might there be different results with trucks burning diesel?? Wish they had tested diesel trucks.
Likely, though (opinion only) since NG burns cleaner, one could assume there are less contaminants and therefore the oil should last even longer, but that did not seem to be the case here. I have no horse in the race per se, I just thought it was an interesting test and result.
 
I'd expect those results from CNG trucks.
I will continue to use bypass filters on my PowerStroke, not to extend the interval, but to have cleaner oil by the end of the OCI. Benefit? For me, yes. For others, maybe not. Lots of folks doing just fine without it.
Chevron should run the same series of tests on diesels.
 
I don't know the difference between a "normal" HDEO and a NG oil, nor have I ever run a NG powered engine to see a UOA from one. I can tell you that a bypass oil filter sure does remove a lot of soot from a diesel engine's oil, regardless of the type.

Chevron has been saying the same thing for at least a couple years, maybe more. Only until now, they were referring to diesels. I lose track of time too easily, but probably a few years ago, I heard a Chevron rep on a radio interview saying that bypass filtration was unnecessary. It's true that many fleets run oil and standard filters for a crazy number of miles with success. The thing is, they may keep those trucks for 400k-600k miles and then say goodbye to them.

There are many owner/operators using Gulf Coast bypass filters and never touching the drain plug...just changing filters and topping off the oil. Others use smaller bypass filters and get a few hundred thousand miles between changes. And then there are those that run the small bypass filters just to remove more soot but don't really get into the oci extension.

In the mid and late 2000s, I used a little FS-2500 bypass filter on my trucks. It most certainly removed much more soot and the oil retained much higher TBN reserve that allowed me to extend the oci with confidence and peace of mind.
 
OMG CNG engines are easy on the oil, gas or diesel. My brother buys used CNG Honda Civic's from the city of Vallejo and uses them for work. I think he gets 15k to 20k miles on his oil and that is with the stock little Honda oil filter. His oil comes out looking better than my motorhome oil does after just 5k miles.

ROD
 
My Take: As engines improve in their design and construction, as lubricants and fuels improve, as the standard air and oil filtration systems improve in efficiency, the need for bypass systems is reduced and the cost effectiveness of installing one moves is reduced.

The Chevron test was not challenging in the least. What they stated was true in that particular case, but if they mean to use that particular test to create a blanket conclusion that bypass systems are no longer a useful tool, that's a big overstatement. Just as it is an overstatement to make the opposite claim about bypass systems. Case by case basis.
 
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
My Take: As engines improve in their design and construction, as lubricants and fuels improve, as the standard air and oil filtration systems improve in efficiency, the need for bypass systems is reduced and the cost effectiveness of installing one moves is reduced.

The Chevron test was not challenging in the least. What they stated was true in that particular case, but if they mean to use that particular test to create a blanket conclusion that bypass systems are no longer a useful tool, that's a big overstatement. Just as it is an overstatement to make the opposite claim about bypass systems. Case by case basis.


Sure glad to hear from you Jim! It's been a long time!
 
Originally Posted By: dustyroads
Sure glad to hear from you Jim! It's been a long time!
Indeed!! Very happy to see you online again.
11.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
My Take: As engines improve in their design and construction, as lubricants and fuels improve, as the standard air and oil filtration systems improve in efficiency, the need for bypass systems is reduced and the cost effectiveness of installing one moves is reduced.

The Chevron test was not challenging in the least. What they stated was true in that particular case, but if they mean to use that particular test to create a blanket conclusion that bypass systems are no longer a useful tool, that's a big overstatement. Just as it is an overstatement to make the opposite claim about bypass systems. Case by case basis.


Jim! I was just thinking about you a couple weeks ago and wondered where you went. I went so far as to look up your user name and find out the last time you made a post in case you were just posting where I wasn't looking. Sure is good to see you are alive and kicking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top