Best no BS motor oil/filter comparison?

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
>>> Those sites that pull filters apart to see what they look like
>>> inside
>>> tell you absolutely nothing useful at all.
>>
>> It told me that the most expensive conventional filter (at the
>> time) had pieces of cardboard glued to the edges of the filter
>> media as end caps.
>
>
>
> It's not "cardboard".

So what is the proper marketing term for paper-like crap?

Ed

Steve W. wrote:

> There are few online sites that have cut open filters and such but
> unless they rig up a test bench, actually run something through the
> filter and prove what it does and doesn't do the results are
> meaningless.

At least the test I saw, he tested the anti-drain back valves. It's a
good idea to buy filters where the valves don't leak, since that reduces
engine wear at start-up.

Regarding the Toyota 90915 he wrote:

"The filter does use a plastic bypass valve similar to the Fram filter,
however I could not make this one leak. It is also held in place by a
steel clip rather than plastic tabs like the Fram."

I suspect that all of the filters actually filter acceptably. The
difference is in the drainback valves, and how large the filter area is.
A filter with more area will take longer to clog up than one with a
smaller filter area.

Construction does matter, because poorly constructed filters will often
fail internally, without any indication. Unless you cut them open when
you remove them, rather than just tossing them, you'll never know that
they failed and not only were they no longer filtering, but dumped
everything they did filter back into the oil that's circulating.

After what happened with the Fram PH6017, which were failing due to
construction quality, I swore off Fram.

On 2008-11-24, HLS > wrote:
>
> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>> I stand by my original assertion: There is not yet any reliable and
>> verifiable evidence to prove that one oil filter is better than another,
>> and, if some /are/ better, to what degree.
>> Tegger
>
>
> I stand with you on this point. One test is worth a thousand expert
> opinions.

Which is why I stick with OEM oil filters. Because at least the
manufacturer tested and approved of them.

"HLS" > wrote in news:_WCWk.6231$W06.4416
@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com:

>
> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>> I stand by my original assertion: There is not yet any reliable and
>> verifiable evidence to prove that one oil filter is better than another,
>> and, if some /are/ better, to what degree.
>> Tegger
>
>
> I stand with you on this point. One test is worth a thousand expert
> opinions.
>



Let's make that "expert" opinions (with quotes).

Without the results of properly designed empirical testing, everybody's an
"expert", the way doctors were "experts" at infectious disease before the
discovery of microbes.

My personal and untested opinion is that most aftermarket oil filters are
about the same quality as most aftermarket car parts, which is to say of
poor and/or questionable quality. that's why I only ever buy OEM for our
(Honda and Toyota) vehicles.


--
Tegger

"C. E. White" > wrote in news:492afc68$1
@kcnews01:

>
> "Tegger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>> Those sites that pull filters apart to see what they look like
>>>> inside
>>>> tell you absolutely nothing useful at all.
>>>
>>> It told me that the most expensive conventional filter (at the
>>> time) had pieces of cardboard glued to the edges of the filter
>>> media as end caps.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's not "cardboard".
>
> So what is the proper marketing term for paper-like crap?
>
>
>
>


It's gasket material, not "cardboard".


--
Tegger

Tegger wrote:
> SMS > wrote in
> :
>
>> Tegger wrote:
>>
>>> Those sites that pull filters apart to see what they look like inside
>>> tell you absolutely nothing useful at all.
>> You're wrong. Those cut-apart evaluations tell you a couple of things.
>>
>> 1. They tell you which filters to absolutely avoid due to
>> exceptionally poor construction.
>
>
>
> Exceptionally poor /looking/ consruction you mean, not exceptionally poor
> /functioning/ construction.


Oh please! If you can permanently deform the cheap bypass spring with
two fingers, or if you can see that the anti-drainback valve doesn't
even fully rest against its backing plate, then it most certainly DOES
mean "exceptionally poor functioning construction." This isn't rocket
science, and anyone with *any* background in
building/tinkering/fabricating can make a pretty darn good assessment of
certain design weaknesses. I'll grant you, it doesn't tell you anything
about the capability of the filter media itself because that's a
microscopic characteristic. But for the big things- you DAMN sure can
tell a lot that would make you rule out certain designs.

Brent P wrote:
> On 2008-11-24, HLS > wrote:
>> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>> I stand by my original assertion: There is not yet any reliable and
>>> verifiable evidence to prove that one oil filter is better than another,
>>> and, if some /are/ better, to what degree.
>>> Tegger
>>
>> I stand with you on this point. One test is worth a thousand expert
>> opinions.
>
> Which is why I stick with OEM oil filters. Because at least the
> manufacturer tested and approved of them.
>
>

At some very primitive, minimal-function level yes. But really buying
OEM means absolutely nothing at all. OEMs get more and more lax about
the replacement parts they "approve" as you get further and further from
the model year in which your car was built. Now if they still use the
same filter on cars currently in their warranty parts stream, you're
better off. But still no guarantees.

Which is why I buy Wix, which just never has any complaints or gripes no
matter where you look.

SMS wrote:
> Steve W. wrote:
>
>> There are few online sites that have cut open filters and such but
>> unless they rig up a test bench, actually run something through the
>> filter and prove what it does and doesn't do the results are meaningless.
>
> At least the test I saw, he tested the anti-drain back valves. It's a
> good idea to buy filters where the valves don't leak, since that reduces
> engine wear at start-up.
>
> Regarding the Toyota 90915 he wrote:
>
> "The filter does use a plastic bypass valve similar to the Fram filter,
> however I could not make this one leak. It is also held in place by a
> steel clip rather than plastic tabs like the Fram."
>
> I suspect that all of the filters actually filter acceptably. The
> difference is in the drainback valves, and how large the filter area is.
> A filter with more area will take longer to clog up than one with a
> smaller filter area.

Not true the way that oil filter media is made. If you look at the
typical oil filter media under pressure you will find that the higher
number of pleats do a worse job of filtering and passing oil. That is
because the pleats tend to press together and restrict flow through
them. They also open other areas in the pleats so the filters actually
filter less.

>
> Construction does matter, because poorly constructed filters will often
> fail internally, without any indication. Unless you cut them open when
> you remove them, rather than just tossing them, you'll never know that
> they failed and not only were they no longer filtering, but dumped
> everything they did filter back into the oil that's circulating.
>
> After what happened with the Fram PH6017, which were failing due to
> construction quality, I swore off Fram.

You do know that Fram MAKES Toyota's filters? They have for quite a
while. They also have made filters for Ford, GM, and even have been a
source for other filter makers as well...


--
Steve W.

"Tegger" > wrote in message
...
> Let's make that "expert" opinions (with quotes).
>
> Without the results of properly designed empirical testing, everybody's an
> "expert", the way doctors were "experts" at infectious disease before the
> discovery of microbes.
>
> My personal and untested opinion is that most aftermarket oil filters are
> about the same quality as most aftermarket car parts, which is to say of
> poor and/or questionable quality. that's why I only ever buy OEM for our
> (Honda and Toyota) vehicles.
> Tegger

Some after-market parts are worse than OEM, and some are better than OEM.
That includes oil filters.

Brent P wrote:
> On 2008-11-24, HLS > wrote:
>> "Tegger" > wrote in message
>>> I stand by my original assertion: There is not yet any reliable and
>>> verifiable evidence to prove that one oil filter is better than another,
>>> and, if some /are/ better, to what degree.
>>> Tegger
>>
>> I stand with you on this point. One test is worth a thousand expert
>> opinions.
>
> Which is why I stick with OEM oil filters. Because at least the
> manufacturer tested and approved of them.
>
>

Not really, they just send a producer the specifications and say what
will you charge us for 50K of this filter.
They specify the color and part number. They may test a few samples but
after that they expect the supplier to stand behind the product.



--
Steve W.
Near Cooperstown, New York