Originally Posted By: Tony10s
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
... Good to see they stay with the 99% @ 20 number and don't try to fudge it higher with no actual data, rounding off 98.67% to 99% is OK.
I guess you think if you keep repeating this then others will buy into it or that maybe you'll feel better about whatever filters you have been using. All filters are not equal and do not all have the same efficiency. Some are way less than 99% at 20 microns. Some are 99% at 40 microns (Purolator Boss), not at 20 microns. One that we know of (WIX XP/NAPA Platinum) is 50% at 20 microns. WIX/NAPA Gold is 95% at 20 microns. FRAM Ultra is 99+% at 20 microns. Most of the old Purolator PureONE yellow filters were 99.9% at 20 microns, and so on .... Anyway, in my opinion, if the filter has an efficiency of 95% or greater at 20 microns, then that's more than good enough for me.
Maybe you have paperwork to show you are in charge of what others can say? Fram says 98.67% is the max efficiency data point, anything more there aren't enough particles to be statistically significant. If they have some new info I suggest you ask them to change what they said. I didn't make this up, I am only quoting what Fram says, the messenger. You don't have to like it. It still is what they say, Yes/ No?