Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Isn't the honda A01 a tough guard? pretty sure thats what my ridgeline2017 uses. - maybe not.
There wouldn’t be much swing from a tough guard to an ultra - a little under the same conditioning and loading likely
The A01 is a Filtech (A US assembled Toko Roki) and the A02 is the Fram (Formally Honeywell). The A02 tested by Amsoil in the 67% range there is no reason to believe the A01 is any more efficient (in fact it is similar in construction to the Toyota filter that tested even lower). Jay has said that the A02 has different media specified by Honda than a Tough Guard. I seem to recall he actually stated the efficiency and it was in rough agreement with the Amsoil test, but cannot find it now.
A02
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2861591
A01
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3403948/
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Without knowing the engine miles and time on the oil its hard to say - Ive seen trace indicated several times but only take note of hours or miles when its my stuff but post always curious to see.
I don’t pay particular attention to it either, but generally the Acura turns in higher insolubles, the Honda trends slightly lower than the Acura and the 3.7 and the Harley the lowest. The Acura and the Honda have the highest miles the 3.7 significantly less and Harley still less (dang job).
Which brings me to my point:
If the insolubles are a good indicator of filter efficiency, why do they tend to trend with the engine vs the filter? If insolubles indicate filter efficiency then going from a ~65% efficient filter to a ~99% efficient filter should make a marked difference, but it does not appear to.
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Im inclined to believe Blackstone has a decent handle on filtration efficiency and performance.
UD
Maybe. I like Blackstone really I do, but sometimes they say stuff that is questionable.
It will be no secret that I just think we put WAY too much faith in UOA’s around here and that I also believe that we try to use them for things which they (at least the ones at the consumer level) were not intended to do (VOA). I believe there is a very narrow purpose and usefulness (Trending and contamination like coolant).
All of that said I belive a marked change in the insolubles on a particular engine might indicate a filtration issue.
I would like to see those used filters you have in the box cut open too, be interesting to see if there is any difference in internal construction.
Now, moving on the the discussion of data.
First of all, if the test have been done and the test prove what SOMS claims they prove on their website, why won’t they provide it publicly? I’m always skeptical in that situation.
Second, can someone explain why the ISO 4548-12 multi-pass would not apply to a particular filter? Microgreen claims an 85% reduction in 5 micron particle count after 40 miles so why would an ISO 4548-12 test not back that up?
Great C&P Im new to the honda and have been getting a slur of contrarian info. Thats helpful .
Microgreen is all over the map on the spec claim of the secondary elements. from 40 miles to 5000. Steve Kirchner said one thing, other data exists elsewhere.
I "believe" the reason that the spec changed on 4548-12 (it did with etc 2017 revision ) is the the dual stages secondaries work so slow that a 4548-12 doenst accurately or won't accurately measure them unless you run it for hundreds of hours.
I can only surmise this is why there arent any dual stages I have yet found that use that test.
With insols on the engine vs the filter - most filter are fairly close in performance, but engine vary wildly in how clean they run I haven't paid a lot of attention to the number as cross referenced against something like a 65% filter and the 99% filter, but Ill certainly be watching going forward and look at some other samples of data to see what I can find.
You, and I and everyone here don't do nearly the testing the lab does - so taking a contrarian position to the lab is always and interesting place to start given as individuals we see far less than the lab does.
On UOA testing what did Werner von Braun say - one test is worth a 1000 expert opinions, although not perfect these should be way better than guesswork.
Im going to do some more testing as its still the best way to separate what people say and what one reads, or even what I think vs. what I know to be fact.
Thanks for taking the time to post your reply.
UD