MicroGreen filter

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: FlyingTexan
I have a feeling my education level is far greater than yours so I'll just say it.... you're wrong and I could do my best to sink to your level and explain it or just let it go. I'm going to just let it go. I posted this because I wanted others to knownits a great product that I've found to be exceptional. Don't talk without knowing. It wouldn't instantly clog because it has a smaller filtration ability which would cause more resistance this the oil would generally follow the path of less resistance=the main filter. I have an engineering background and see no fault in what they've stated thus far. But keep talking I guess.

How exactly have you found their filters "exceptional"? The cartridge filters are clearly deficient in design, and we've also seen issues with the construction of the canister filters and the ADV. The company publishes no useful ISO filtration data, and has not responded to several requests for additional information from both myself and at least one other person from this board. So unless you have run ISO filtration tests and can provide the results, how do you make the statement that they are exceptional? What supported argument can you make that they do a better job filtering oil than does a Fram Ultra? Or even an orange can for that matter?

I too have an engineering background. The reason you see no fault in what they've stated is because they haven't stated anything that documents proof of performance. Kind of like the additive companies, if you make your claims nebulous and ultimately unprovable by the end user then you can't be held to any specific performance claim.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: AirgunSavant
He is talking about the cartridge versions and not the screw on cans.

I knew that. I can't believe someone thought GM V8s had the cartridge oil filters. That engine has never used those.

Cartridge MicroGreens are questionable. When they bunch up, or when they don't, you have to assume the green foam catches and holds small particles.
When bunched up, I could see how some flow would get through the bunched up part, and some tiny particles might lodge in there.

Elusive MicroGreen must provide some sort of test data. Shame on them for not. They try to sell these to fleets, so the cartridge oil filters would be a hard-sell if I was the fleet manager.


Chevrolet and GMC truck and passenger car V8 motors in the 1950's and 1960's had canister filters. Ended around 1968 or so, a little sooner for passenger car which were the first to adopt the spin-ons.

An old High Performance trick is to use an adapter and the long GM canister truck filter. You can use the adapter on any Chevrolet-type GM smallblock up to the later generation versions that comes OEM with a spin-on filter, although clearance is sometimes an issue, there are both "short" (passenger car) and "long" (truck) versions. You don't see that advice much anymore, but if you read any of the HP Books about performance rebuilds, you will come across it.

The canister filters are slightly more efficient because even the passenger car "short" versions have more media than spin-ons.

 

[Sayjac]

I'm confused about the nomenclature being used by some for filter types noted in this thread. 'Afaik' and have long read, a "canister filter" is as 'spin on' filter. It includes the element or cartridge and the outer can as one piece. Otoh, a "cartridge" filter is the cartridge (element) alone and is intended to be inserted/installed in a permanent engine housing for filter change.

As for topic, always find these MG threads to be somewhat amusing if contentious. Happen to agree with one poster's thought in this thread regarding the filters and company, but will just leave it at that.

 

[DdDd]

Snake oil hustlers are nothing new. And no amount of edumacating is going to help much if you fall for their ruse or use said education to mislead others.

A foam sock on an oil filter just screams incompetence. What is the prefilter for? Did they test the foam in 280 degree oil? If there are that many large chunks coming off your engine your choice of filter ain't helping much!

Feel free to use whatever junk you want on your car. And they are junk otherwise far larger entities would have done it first. They are junk because they recommend 35K OCIs on their filters.

The OEM that did the engineering already put a filter good enough to make the engine outlast the rest of the car.

 

[bullwinkle]

The Microgreen guys started out with the seed of a good idea-but unfortunately they didn't engineer it correctly (no way to force oil through the bypass, it's going to go through the less restrictive regular media), performed no meaningful documented tests (no ISO numbers), and outsourced the whole manufacturing process to China! No wonder no one trusts them & they have to rely on marketing bull to sell anything.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
The canister filters are slightly more efficient because even the passenger car "short" versions have more media than spin-ons.
A "canister" is a spin-on. A cartridge gets inserted into a permanent housing.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: DdDd
Feel free to use whatever junk you want on your car. And they are junk otherwise far larger entities would have done it first. They are junk because they recommend 35K OCIs on their filters.
Wrong. MicroGreen says their filters go about 10k miles. They say change the filter, and then leave oil in for 30k miles. Read what they actually say instead of something you've imagined.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
.....didn't engineer it correctly (no way to force oil through the bypass, it's going to go through the less restrictive regular media), ....
Wrong. About 1% or so of the flow gets passed thru the parallel path disc for better filtering on a multi-pass basis. This is a natural consequence of parallel path flow, such as in a parallel electrical circuit where one light bulb is low resistance and gets most of the flow, and the other light bulb is high resistance (low power) and gets low flow.

 

[Tony10s]

^^^ I heard someone say that a person can be 100% right and 100% wrong at the same time because of the way he or she goes about correcting other people.

 

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
The Microgreen guys started out with the seed of a good idea-but unfortunately they didn't engineer it correctly (no way to force oil through the bypass, it's going to go through the less restrictive regular media), performed no meaningful documented tests (no ISO numbers), and outsourced the whole manufacturing process to China! No wonder no one trusts them & they have to rely on marketing bull to sell anything.

I thought that too but then read more about how the pressure is equal everywhere inside the filter, higher on the clean side than on the dirty side. So there is the same oil pressure on the disk as on the main element and oil flows through it, but at a lesser rate. Since one side of it has the higher pressure and the inside part the lower pressure, oil has to flow. That's why I think a cellulose filter may be better than people like to think. The random areas of very dense wood fibers may filter much finer, but slower, than looser woven parts. They even absorb and hold water. The end result, maybe cleaner oil after some period of use. Depends on the manufacturer I guess. A number of companies like Baldwin have bypass filtration inside one filter canister. It does work.
"Bypass" as in go around something, whether it is another route to the oil pan by tubing, or around the main element by restriction.

 

[bullwinkle]

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
The Microgreen guys started out with the seed of a good idea-but unfortunately they didn't engineer it correctly (no way to force oil through the bypass, it's going to go through the less restrictive regular media), performed no meaningful documented tests (no ISO numbers), and outsourced the whole manufacturing process to China! No wonder no one trusts them & they have to rely on marketing bull to sell anything.

I thought that too but then read more about how the pressure is equal everywhere inside the filter, higher on the clean side than on the dirty side. So there is the same oil pressure on the disk as on the main element and oil flows through it, but at a lesser rate. Since one side of it has the higher pressure and the inside part the lower pressure, oil has to flow. That's why I think a cellulose filter may be better than people like to think. The random areas of very dense wood fibers may filter much finer, but slower, than looser woven parts. They even absorb and hold water. The end result, maybe cleaner oil after some period of use. Depends on the manufacturer I guess. A number of companies like Baldwin have bypass filtration inside one filter canister. It does work.
"Bypass" as in go around something, whether it is another route to the oil pan by tubing, or around the main element by restriction.
My issue with the disk is that it's going to take an elevated Delta P to raise the pressure across the disk enough to get much, if any, oil to take that path as opposed to just going through the regular media to the low side-plus there's not much media area to hold anything even if it went through. There are plenty of ways to get bypass filtration-a Frantz TP setup, an Amsoil bypass filter, even a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi (for a diesel application)-I'm not convinced that the Microgreen is anything but a big steaming pile of overpriced Chinese marketing hype!

 

[DdDd]

My owners manual says under no circumstances to exceed a 10k OCI. That's on the fairly generous side.

Snake oil Micro Greed tells me I can take the oil out to 35k miles! Amazing... They must know something spectacular that no multi billion dollar OEM had managed to figure out with hundreds of engineers on their payroll!

Now the "experts" are out in full swing defending their [censored] brand. $11 for a lousy Chinese filter, with a foam sock and a pretend bypass disc the size of a penny. Which costs double my OEM filter. Using an oil change MORE THAN DOUBLE of what even Mobil 1 recommends on their extended performance oil.

Like I said before. LOLZ

 

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
The Microgreen guys started out with the seed of a good idea-but unfortunately they didn't engineer it correctly (no way to force oil through the bypass, it's going to go through the less restrictive regular media), performed no meaningful documented tests (no ISO numbers), and outsourced the whole manufacturing process to China! No wonder no one trusts them & they have to rely on marketing bull to sell anything.

I thought that too but then read more about how the pressure is equal everywhere inside the filter, higher on the clean side than on the dirty side. So there is the same oil pressure on the disk as on the main element and oil flows through it, but at a lesser rate. Since one side of it has the higher pressure and the inside part the lower pressure, oil has to flow. That's why I think a cellulose filter may be better than people like to think. The random areas of very dense wood fibers may filter much finer, but slower, than looser woven parts. They even absorb and hold water. The end result, maybe cleaner oil after some period of use. Depends on the manufacturer I guess. A number of companies like Baldwin have bypass filtration inside one filter canister. It does work.
"Bypass" as in go around something, whether it is another route to the oil pan by tubing, or around the main element by restriction.
My issue with the disk is that it's going to take an elevated Delta P to raise the pressure across the disk enough to get much, if any, oil to take that path as opposed to just going through the regular media to the low side-plus there's not much media area to hold anything even if it went through. There are plenty of ways to get bypass filtration-a Frantz TP setup, an Amsoil bypass filter, even a Fleetguard Stratapore Venturi (for a diesel application)-I'm not convinced that the Microgreen is anything but a big steaming pile of overpriced Chinese marketing hype!


So you say because the high flow part keeps the DP low that the fine filter is too restrictive to flow at all? Sounds reasonable. I think though if the bypass disk has porosity it will flow something. Maybe one drop a minute if it is restrictive but something. I do think MG would keep the porosity so as to enable enough flow. My MG was made in Mexico. I think must have been made by Wix or Baldwin from the looks of it. I never used it due to the adbv doesn't open unless the element moves up and off the baseplate.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I think though if the bypass disk has porosity it will flow something. Maybe one drop a minute if it is restrictive but something. I do think MG would keep the porosity so as to enable enough flow.

goodtimes, you are right. Non-engineers seem to struggle with the concept of parallel path flow.

For those still struggling with the concept, look around your house.
Find a big bright light bulb. .... Now find a small low-power tiny one.
They are wired on a parallel path, and the low-power one gets very little flow due to its high resistance.
The big bright bulb gets more flow due to its low resistance.

The disc inside a canister spin-on MicroGreen is like the low-power tiny light bulb in the analogy above, getting very little flow due to its high resistance.
It doesn't take much flow through the disc for the concept to work OK (maybe 1%), which is why MicroGreen has the right idea and it does work.
The main media inside the filter is like the big bright light bulb in the above analogy, getting most of the flow.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
goodtimes, you are right. Non-engineers seem to struggle with the concept of parallel path flow.

For those still struggling with the concept, look around your house.
Find a big bright light bulb. .... Now find a small low-power tiny one.
They are wired on a parallel path, and the low-power one gets very little flow due to its high resistance.
The big bright bulb gets more flow due to its low resistance.

The disc inside a canister spin-on MicroGreen is like the low-power tiny light bulb in the analogy above, getting very little flow due to its high resistance.
It doesn't take much flow through the disc for the concept to work OK (maybe 1%), which is why MicroGreen has the right idea and it does work.
The main media inside the filter is like the big bright light bulb in the above analogy, getting most of the flow.

I'm an engineer, and I'll tell you what I struggle with. I struggle with the complete lack of ISO filtration data and any other evidence that the microGreen does anything besides being a normal filter. No one knows what the porosity is of the sintered Teflon disk is, and whether it does nothing beneficial towards filtration, does a good job, or clogs up within the first 10 hours of operation. No one knows. And your 1% figure that you keep repeating - where are you getting that from exactly?

I also struggle with the goofy statements on microGreen's website which are indicative of an entity that is trying to make something sound better than it is. If you have good data, then in my experience you present it, not obfuscate things.

I struggle with the idea that if some company so poorly designs a product such as their cartridge filter that somehow, someway they magically make a canister filter that is so effective. But then again no one knows because they provide no standardized data to show the effectiveness of the filters.

I struggle with the fact that all we have are people on a board such as this that make repeated defenses of something that has only shown incompetence in design.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted By: kschachn

No one knows what the porosit of the disk is, and whether it clogs up within the first 10 hours of operation.


That is my suspicion.

It just doesn't have any real surface area.

 

[UncleDave]

Its tiny disk is not the equivalent of a stacked disk type canister , or a separately plumbed bypass,as evidenced by its modest sump life extension compared to either prior mentioned types that are known for extremely long sump lives.

There is easy to find third party fleet evidence it works as claimed though just by searching through their fleet contracts they've bothered to expose, then we have firsthand evidence here they have won more fleet contracts as we've seen one come on a car a well known poster bought at a fleet auction (put there by accident I think not).

We've also seen their claim tested and it met its claim using this sites gold testing standard blackstone which is just more evidence it has some merit.

When government and city fleet guys sign on publicly using them says a lot as they have the resources and means to regularly test and report.

It's all here and on the inter-webs you ether believe they did their homework or not.

I trust these 3rd parties more than Mfg singular claims, and way more than any poster heres' mere opinion, or selective assessment of available information on them.

I dont trust any manufacturers specs a whole lot as they change and drift all the time, are subject to continuos revision, and are rarely backed up by third party verification.



UD

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
When government and city fleet guys sign on publicly using them says a lot as they have the resources and means to regularly test and report.
"Standard Oil initially tested the filter on several service vans and received oil analysis reports from an independent laboratory to monitor the filter’s effectiveness. These analyses demonstrated that the cleanliness and quality of the oil was not only maintained over time, but actually improved." --- http://www.aftermarketnews.com/standard-...ts-fleet-of-60/

Would like to see their results, or those of Polk County FL, Oxnard CA, TruGreen, etc. fleets.
Philosophical arguments and cynicism are fine, but fleet results and analysis rule.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Would like to see their results, or those of Polk County FL, Oxnard CA, TruGreen, etc. fleets.
Philosophical arguments and cynicism are fine, but fleet results and analysis rule.

Completely unnecessary for the purposes of this discussion, all we need is the result of ISO 4548-12.

 

[pbm]

I believe it was BITOGer DBMaster who ran MGs in his Mazda and went 30K (on the oil...changing the MG every 10K) without issue and had good UOAs...