Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
rated" filter?

"MikeinIN" <mikefye@insight.bb.com> wrote in message
news:JaAOd.59666$EG1.11801@attbi_s53...
>
> I have had the opportunity to study quite a lot of closely held
> oil/filter/wear information. Here's the basics:
>
> In a perfect world, using a premium lower-micron rated filter and changing
> it frequently can allow a synthetic oil to be used over and over for many
> miles and still maintain minimal total wear. The cost of using synthetic
> oil is the oil, not the filter. Premium filters generally cost around
$10.

> MikeinIN (engineer in an automotive related industry)

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
That Is the WORST thing you could do !!!! huh?
To do so correctly, you will then have to make SERIOUS modifications to
the oil flow system: bigger pump, bigger gallery to the filter, larger
bypass circuit and larger/stronger bypass valve.

If you reduce the retention size by half, you will absolutely need a
filter that has FOUR times the surface area .... and will have to
increase the oil pressure inside the filter OR the bypass will be open
4 times longer than normal ..... lets see how this adds up. 1/4 the
filter efficiency, about 1/3 the actual volume of oil filtered, ------
thats 1/12 the gravimetric removal efficiency ..... doesnt sound like a
good deal to me. It will also mean that suspended particulate will
remain IN the sump free to circulate LONGER inside the oil lube
galleries ..... NOT a good idea to use a smaller retention rating
filter.

..... let you in a dirty filtration industry secret. Only a very few
paper mills make the technical resinated paper used in automotive oil
filters; and, what you get for retention one day is not the same as
the next day due to the 'variability' of 'paper making' .... unless
you're willing to pay through the nose for the tech paper. Fram,
Mobil1, Wix, etc. DO NOT MAKE THE PAPER .... they all BUY the resinated
paper from essentially the SAME supplier(s). So, you tell me which one
is better? ..... the one with more paper stuffed inside (but not so
stuffed that the pleats touch one another).

I will state again (with emphasis) .... the BEST filter in a constantly
recirculating filter system is the LARGEST filter you can fit on.
Using a smaller retention filter media wont help and actually will make
matters MUCH worse! Heres why: the smaller retention media has higher
operating pressure drop thus the volumetric flow through the filter is
less; reduce the pore size retention by half and the flow rate drops in
half or more. The smaller retention media will quifckly plug (because
there are exponentially more smaller particles in any fluid and thus
will 'plug' the filter faster) .... and the bypass will then open thus
you get NO filtration. Reduce the retention size by half and get 1/3
the useful life (debris capacity). In a recirculation mode filtration
you are not looking for 'absolute retention' but HOW FAST the entire
sump volume turns over .... and heres why (again): all filter media
will retain particulate smaller that its 'rating' to a certain
percent, each time the fluid passes through the filter a small amount
of the smaller than rated particles get captured, the MORE fluid
(faster) that is able to flow through the media the more opportunity
for capture (at all levels of retention). The LARGER the filter the
faster the total volumetric flow (because of less resistance) and you
will move MORE oil.

For instance, you could use compressed pubic hair as the filtration
media and ***recirculate*** (Keyword here!) enough times that you will
eventually trap every particle down to macro-molecular size .... just
give me enough time to do it. Since there isnt enough pubic hair in
the world (because of it inefficiency to filter), the filter folks use
the same media that is used to filter BEER and you know how clean beer
is ..... and the more BEER you drink, the more pubic hair there is on
the ground to collect. <G>

Oil Filters do NOT work like screen doors; ........ many many
particles larger then the 'rating' will pass right through while many
particles much less than the 'rating' will be captured (statistical
averages) .... the BEST filter in a recirculating oil system is the
LARGEST filter ,,,, the bypass will be open less time and MORE (total)
gallons oil will **actually** go through the filter thus the filter
will be more efficient in capture efficiency, etc. Filters do NOT
work like screen doors; they have surface area AND "thickness/depth' of
the media. The mechanisms of retention INSIDE the filter are 1. seiving
(screen door); 2. inertial impaction of the fluid stream inside the
media, and 3. surface adsorbtion (electronic charge). Put on the
LARGEST filter that will fit: NOT the filter with a 'tighter' 'pore
size rating'. .... and you WILL get retention of smaller particles
(smaller than the 'rating), you will capture MORE crud, and will filter
MORE total oil (bypass not open as much). It gets better: with a
larger filter and MORE oil actually going through the filter, if you
have a 'crash' instide the engine that creates a 'particle storm' ,
since the larger filter is filtering the oil FASTER, the particles will
get trapped faster thus the particles will decrease in the lube circuit
FASTER, much faster. Change to a smaller retention filter .... and the
'storm' removal back to 'normal' becomes VERY slow.

*******
Now if someone could tell me where on this particular planet I can find
different thickness/diameter powerpiston metering rods for an Old
Rochester 2SE carb I would appreciate it - they arent the same rods
used in a Q-Jet, and no one at the stealership remembers what a carb
looks like.



> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
>

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
That Is the WORST thing you could do !!!! huh?
To do so correctly, you will then have to make SERIOUS modifications to
the oil flow system: bigger pump, bigger gallery to the filter, larger
bypass circuit and larger/stronger bypass valve.

If you reduce the retention size by half, you will absolutely need a
filter that has FOUR times the surface area .... and will have to
increase the oil pressure inside the filter OR the bypass will be open
4 times longer than normal ..... lets see how this adds up. 1/4 the
filter efficiency, about 1/3 the actual volume of oil filtered, ------
thats 1/12 the gravimetric removal efficiency ..... doesnt sound like a
good deal to me. It will also mean that suspended particulate will
remain IN the sump free to circulate LONGER inside the oil lube
galleries ..... NOT a good idea to use a smaller retention rating
filter.

..... let you in a dirty filtration industry secret. Only a very few
paper mills make the technical resinated paper used in automotive oil
filters; and, what you get for retention one day is not the same as
the next day due to the 'variability' of 'paper making' .... unless
you're willing to pay through the nose for the tech paper. Fram,
Mobil1, Wix, etc. DO NOT MAKE THE PAPER .... they all BUY the resinated
paper from essentially the SAME supplier(s). So, you tell me which one
is better? ..... the one with more paper stuffed inside (but not so
stuffed that the pleats touch one another).

I will state again (with emphasis) .... the BEST filter in a constantly
recirculating filter system is the LARGEST filter you can fit on.
Using a smaller retention filter media wont help and actually will make
matters MUCH worse! Heres why: the smaller retention media has higher
operating pressure drop thus the volumetric flow through the filter is
less; reduce the pore size retention by half and the flow rate drops in
half or more. The smaller retention media will quifckly plug (because
there are exponentially more smaller particles in any fluid and thus
will 'plug' the filter faster) .... and the bypass will then open thus
you get NO filtration. Reduce the retention size by half and get 1/3
the useful life (debris capacity). In a recirculation mode filtration
you are not looking for 'absolute retention' but HOW FAST the entire
sump volume turns over .... and heres why (again): all filter media
will retain particulate smaller that its 'rating' to a certain
percent, each time the fluid passes through the filter a small amount
of the smaller than rated particles get captured, the MORE fluid
(faster) that is able to flow through the media the more opportunity
for capture (at all levels of retention). The LARGER the filter the
faster the total volumetric flow (because of less resistance) and you
will move MORE oil.

For instance, you could use compressed pubic hair as the filtration
media and ***recirculate*** (Keyword here!) enough times that you will
eventually trap every particle down to macro-molecular size .... just
give me enough time to do it. Since there isnt enough pubic hair in
the world (because of it inefficiency to filter), the filter folks use
the same media that is used to filter BEER and you know how clean beer
is ..... and the more BEER you drink, the more pubic hair there is on
the ground to collect. <G>

Oil Filters do NOT work like screen doors; ........ many many
particles larger then the 'rating' will pass right through while many
particles much less than the 'rating' will be captured (statistical
averages) .... the BEST filter in a recirculating oil system is the
LARGEST filter ,,,, the bypass will be open less time and MORE (total)
gallons oil will **actually** go through the filter thus the filter
will be more efficient in capture efficiency, etc. Filters do NOT
work like screen doors; they have surface area AND "thickness/depth' of
the media. The mechanisms of retention INSIDE the filter are 1. seiving
(screen door); 2. inertial impaction of the fluid stream inside the
media, and 3. surface adsorbtion (electronic charge). Put on the
LARGEST filter that will fit: NOT the filter with a 'tighter' 'pore
size rating'. .... and you WILL get retention of smaller particles
(smaller than the 'rating), you will capture MORE crud, and will filter
MORE total oil (bypass not open as much). It gets better: with a
larger filter and MORE oil actually going through the filter, if you
have a 'crash' instide the engine that creates a 'particle storm' ,
since the larger filter is filtering the oil FASTER, the particles will
get trapped faster thus the particles will decrease in the lube circuit
FASTER, much faster. Change to a smaller retention filter .... and the
'storm' removal back to 'normal' becomes VERY slow.

*******
Now if someone could tell me where on this particular planet I can find
different thickness/diameter powerpiston metering rods for an Old
Rochester 2SE carb I would appreciate it - they arent the same rods
used in a Q-Jet, and no one at the stealership remembers what a carb
looks like.



> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
>

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
That Is the WORST thing you could do !!!! huh?
To do so correctly, you will then have to make SERIOUS modifications to
the oil flow system: bigger pump, bigger gallery to the filter, larger
bypass circuit and larger/stronger bypass valve.

If you reduce the retention size by half, you will absolutely need a
filter that has FOUR times the surface area .... and will have to
increase the oil pressure inside the filter OR the bypass will be open
4 times longer than normal ..... lets see how this adds up. 1/4 the
filter efficiency, about 1/3 the actual volume of oil filtered, ------
thats 1/12 the gravimetric removal efficiency ..... doesnt sound like a
good deal to me. It will also mean that suspended particulate will
remain IN the sump free to circulate LONGER inside the oil lube
galleries ..... NOT a good idea to use a smaller retention rating
filter.

..... let you in a dirty filtration industry secret. Only a very few
paper mills make the technical resinated paper used in automotive oil
filters; and, what you get for retention one day is not the same as
the next day due to the 'variability' of 'paper making' .... unless
you're willing to pay through the nose for the tech paper. Fram,
Mobil1, Wix, etc. DO NOT MAKE THE PAPER .... they all BUY the resinated
paper from essentially the SAME supplier(s). So, you tell me which one
is better? ..... the one with more paper stuffed inside (but not so
stuffed that the pleats touch one another).

I will state again (with emphasis) .... the BEST filter in a constantly
recirculating filter system is the LARGEST filter you can fit on.
Using a smaller retention filter media wont help and actually will make
matters MUCH worse! Heres why: the smaller retention media has higher
operating pressure drop thus the volumetric flow through the filter is
less; reduce the pore size retention by half and the flow rate drops in
half or more. The smaller retention media will quifckly plug (because
there are exponentially more smaller particles in any fluid and thus
will 'plug' the filter faster) .... and the bypass will then open thus
you get NO filtration. Reduce the retention size by half and get 1/3
the useful life (debris capacity). In a recirculation mode filtration
you are not looking for 'absolute retention' but HOW FAST the entire
sump volume turns over .... and heres why (again): all filter media
will retain particulate smaller that its 'rating' to a certain
percent, each time the fluid passes through the filter a small amount
of the smaller than rated particles get captured, the MORE fluid
(faster) that is able to flow through the media the more opportunity
for capture (at all levels of retention). The LARGER the filter the
faster the total volumetric flow (because of less resistance) and you
will move MORE oil.

For instance, you could use compressed pubic hair as the filtration
media and ***recirculate*** (Keyword here!) enough times that you will
eventually trap every particle down to macro-molecular size .... just
give me enough time to do it. Since there isnt enough pubic hair in
the world (because of it inefficiency to filter), the filter folks use
the same media that is used to filter BEER and you know how clean beer
is ..... and the more BEER you drink, the more pubic hair there is on
the ground to collect. <G>

Oil Filters do NOT work like screen doors; ........ many many
particles larger then the 'rating' will pass right through while many
particles much less than the 'rating' will be captured (statistical
averages) .... the BEST filter in a recirculating oil system is the
LARGEST filter ,,,, the bypass will be open less time and MORE (total)
gallons oil will **actually** go through the filter thus the filter
will be more efficient in capture efficiency, etc. Filters do NOT
work like screen doors; they have surface area AND "thickness/depth' of
the media. The mechanisms of retention INSIDE the filter are 1. seiving
(screen door); 2. inertial impaction of the fluid stream inside the
media, and 3. surface adsorbtion (electronic charge). Put on the
LARGEST filter that will fit: NOT the filter with a 'tighter' 'pore
size rating'. .... and you WILL get retention of smaller particles
(smaller than the 'rating), you will capture MORE crud, and will filter
MORE total oil (bypass not open as much). It gets better: with a
larger filter and MORE oil actually going through the filter, if you
have a 'crash' instide the engine that creates a 'particle storm' ,
since the larger filter is filtering the oil FASTER, the particles will
get trapped faster thus the particles will decrease in the lube circuit
FASTER, much faster. Change to a smaller retention filter .... and the
'storm' removal back to 'normal' becomes VERY slow.

*******
Now if someone could tell me where on this particular planet I can find
different thickness/diameter powerpiston metering rods for an Old
Rochester 2SE carb I would appreciate it - they arent the same rods
used in a Q-Jet, and no one at the stealership remembers what a carb
looks like.



> What brand(s) of oil filter would you recommend as a "premium lower-micron
> rated" filter?
>

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

That's right!
And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

Steve wrote:
> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
> inside.
>
> http://www.canadiantire.ca
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> JimG wrote:
>
>> That Canadian Tire place must be the $hit up there! All you guys from
>> CA talk about it.
>>
>> JimG
>>
>> "Steve" wrote in message ...
>>
>>> Just did some reading and found out that the Canadian Tire Formula 1
>>> synthetic filters are based on the relatively decent Fram ToughGuard
>>> as opposed to the notoriously awful paper/cardboard ExtraGuard. Maybe
>>> not a bad choice after all. The Quaker State & Pennzoil filters are
>>> ExtraGuards.

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

That's right!
And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

Steve wrote:
> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
> inside.
>
> http://www.canadiantire.ca
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> JimG wrote:
>
>> That Canadian Tire place must be the $hit up there! All you guys from
>> CA talk about it.
>>
>> JimG
>>
>> "Steve" wrote in message ...
>>
>>> Just did some reading and found out that the Canadian Tire Formula 1
>>> synthetic filters are based on the relatively decent Fram ToughGuard
>>> as opposed to the notoriously awful paper/cardboard ExtraGuard. Maybe
>>> not a bad choice after all. The Quaker State & Pennzoil filters are
>>> ExtraGuards.

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

That's right!
And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

Steve wrote:
> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
> inside.
>
> http://www.canadiantire.ca
>
> Steve
> http://xjeep.dyndns.org
>
>
> JimG wrote:
>
>> That Canadian Tire place must be the $hit up there! All you guys from
>> CA talk about it.
>>
>> JimG
>>
>> "Steve" wrote in message ...
>>
>>> Just did some reading and found out that the Canadian Tire Formula 1
>>> synthetic filters are based on the relatively decent Fram ToughGuard
>>> as opposed to the notoriously awful paper/cardboard ExtraGuard. Maybe
>>> not a bad choice after all. The Quaker State & Pennzoil filters are
>>> ExtraGuards.

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

FrankW did pass the time by typing:
> That's right!
> And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

You have to respect a car parts place that also sells microwaves
and blenders, eh.

This is our local c-tire type store. www.pepboys.com

> Steve wrote:
>> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
>> inside.
>>
>> http://www.canadiantire.ca

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

FrankW did pass the time by typing:
> That's right!
> And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

You have to respect a car parts place that also sells microwaves
and blenders, eh.

This is our local c-tire type store. www.pepboys.com

> Steve wrote:
>> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
>> inside.
>>
>> http://www.canadiantire.ca

Re: Mobile 1 Extended Performance
 

FrankW did pass the time by typing:
> That's right!
> And the local "peeler" bar takes canadian tire money at par. :-)

You have to respect a car parts place that also sells microwaves
and blenders, eh.

This is our local c-tire type store. www.pepboys.com

> Steve wrote:
>> It's kind of a love/hate relationship. Think Walmart with a Pep Boys
>> inside.
>>
>> http://www.canadiantire.ca