What's new
By:
TurboTransAm.com

Register today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside...

PhillyTurboSix

PhillyTurboSix

Administrator
Staff member
Here are some recent independent tests on the oil filters that are out there. I always use Mobil One and or K&N oil filters in my TTA and GN's, but you can below how the filters you are using add up. One thing you'll find is AC Delco is on the bottom of the list every time!

I always like Purolator One filters on my daily drivers and I'm glad to see they ranked very good in this comparison. Notice how AC Delco ranked poorly time and time again! Some tests show AC Delco as one of the worst oil filters out there! As I've always said do not run an AC Delco oil filter on your TTA just to run an AC Delco. It's not worth it at all and you'll see why below!

Now this was done by a Ford guy so you'll see ratings on Motorcraft filters as well. Motorcraft filters were always a good filter and I use to run them on one of my Chevy trucks I liked them so much.

DO NOT use the part numbers below for your TTA! The part numbers are for Ford products this guy tested but it's a really good comparison chat when asking "what filter should I run on my TTA" I also removed the Motorcraft filter comparisons he used just to not load this thread up with filters most will never use on their TTA. So you might see references back to Motorcraft part numbers and filters.

Most of us only change the oil once or twice a year due to the miles we put on our cars but spending the money and buying a top rated filter is what it's all about! Buy right the first time and don't cheap out when it comes to the life line of your TTA! Oil and filter are a major part to making your TTA last a long long time!

ttarider

Read on....

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Purolator PureOne PL34631 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This filter is a strong contender to the Motorcraft FL820S for the “Ed’s Best Ford Filter Award.” The FL-820S and PL34631 Filters appear to be produced by the same manufacturer since they share many parts and construction techniques. I rate the FL820S slightly higher. The main advantage of the PL34631 is the surface area and total volume of filter media. Although the PL34631 media is slightly thinner than the FL-820S media (0.030" vs. 0.035"), it has much more surface area (234 sq. in. vs. 156 sq. in) and a much greater total volume (7 cu. in. vs. 5.4 cu. in.). On the other hand, the PL24651 relief valve is at the dome end, which might allow oil to be recontaminated if the filter goes into the bypass mode. The PL34631 has a slightly inferior anti-drain back valve design. The FL-820S clearly has the better relief valve design - a feature which certainly cost much more than the PL34631's relief valve. Purolator also claims a much higher efficiency rating for the PureOne than Motorcraft does for the FL-820S, but I am of the opinion that Motorcraft is underrating their filter.

Who might choose the PL34631 Filter over the FL-820S? If you are running a modified engine with a high capacity oil pump, and/or thicker oil you might consider the PureOne filter, the thinner media with the larger surface area should allow for a higher flow rate (although the PureOne’s thinner can material might cause a problem). However, the FL-820S's superior relief valve should be factored into this choice.

Some owners may want to debate whether or not this filter is as good as the FL-820S, but the PL34631 is significantly more expensive ($5.88 vs. $3.28 for the FL-820S).


[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Donaldson P550965 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter was a surprise. I expected it to be a private label version of a filter from one of the other manufacturers. What I got was Donaldson manufactured filter that is lower cost version of the Amsoil EaO11 Filter. It seems that Donaldson must be the manufacturer of the Amsoil filter. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This was a very well constructed filter that has two significant negatives in my opinion. First it has the dome end relief valve. Secondly it has a nitrile Anti-Drain Back Valve. Both components are well designed, but not of the type I prefer. The media appeared to be at least as good as the media used in the K&N, Mobil 1, and Denso Filters. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]If you aren't concerned by the ADBV material and the relief valve location, this is a very good filter. I am uncomfortable using a filter with a nitrile ADBV on a Ford modular engine. [/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Denso 150-1014 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Denso 150-1014 Oil Filter is a well made filter that is just a little different from the main stream “premium” filters (as opposed to the Amsoil Ea011 which is a lot different). The media, relief valve, and anti-drain back valve are similar to the K&N HP-2010 and Mobil M1-210 Filters. The media is a little thinner (0.025"), but the surface area of the media is very good (comparable to the Wix 51372). Unfortunately the filter is expensive ($10.95 internet price not including shipping). The filter's price is in between the K&N and Mobil 1 Filter. I would rate its construction slightly ahead of those two filters, but all three are over-priced.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The unique features of the Denso 150-1014 Filter include:[/FONT]

  1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*]Unique base gasket. The gasket is flat and thin except for a raised rounded section. Denso refers to this as a "Torque Stopper" and claims it makes proper installation and removal easier. The gasket is also pre-lubricated.
    [*]The base gasket is retained by having a section of the gasket fit under a flange formed in the base.
    [*]Stepped media. Most (all the other) filters have flutes (folds) in the media with a consistent depth. The Denso filter has groups of flutes with reduced depth spaced around the filter element. I have no idea why. Possibly it is designed to allow for better distribution of the oil flow.
    [*]Instead of gluing the ends of the filter media together like most other filters, Denso uses a metal clip to make the joint. They are not unique in using a metal clip (the Fram PH2, Fram TG2, and Amsoil Ea011 also use metal clips for this purpose). What is different is the location of the clip. The other filters that use the clip have it on the outside of the media. The Denso filter has it on the inside. I have no facts that allow me to say which location is better, but until I have a good reason to favor the internal location, I prefer the external clip design. I prefer glued joints over either metal clip location.
    [*]This is the only filter I have evaluated that was not made in the USA. It is made in Japan.    [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I believe this to be a very good filter, but it is over-priced in my opinion. And like most of the other filters I have evaluated, it has a dome end pressure relief valve. In my opinion, this makes the filter less desirable than the Motorcraft FL-820S. Since the Denso filter costs over three times as much as the Motorcraft FL-820S, I don't see any compelling reason to go out of your way to find this filter. If it was priced competitively with the FL-820S, I'd still prefer the FL-820S because of the relief valve design.[/FONT]



[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Amsoil EA024 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I would like to comment on the excellent Customer Service that Amsoil provided. I ordered the filter via the web on Tuesday night and it was waiting for me at home Thursday after work. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]There is nothing cheap about this filter, either in cost or quality of construction. Despite this I am not in love with this filter. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The overall layout of this filter is very similar to most of the filters I have evaluated. However, the media is truly unique. Like the Mobil M1-210, Amsoil claims to use “synthetic” media. However, the Mobi1 "synthetic" media looks about the same as the cellulose media in the FL-820S. The same cannot be said for the "Full Synthetic Media" used in the Ea024 Filter. Not only is the Ea024 media a pure white color, it feels completely different. Unfortunately it also appears to be very soft and flexible, more like a cashmere sweater than the stiff paper-like filter media in the other “premium” filters. It also peels apart easily. These characteristics of the media appear to have forced some unique additions to the filter. The media is bonded to a stiff steel wire mesh which stiffens it considerably. And the joint between the ends of the media is sealed with a crimped metal clip, rather than being glued as is the case for most other “premium” filters. I like the wire reinforcement. I am not impressed with the metal clip joining the ends of the media. I am of the opinion that this joint might loosen under some condition and allow unfiltered oil to pass through. I am also not impressed with the surface area or total volume of the media. The Ea024 has less than 60% of the surface area and total volume of the filter media in the M1-302 filter. If you combine this with the claimed high efficiency and tight micron rating, I cannot see how you can expect this filter to be good for 25,000 miles as claimed by Amsoil. It may be that the unique media has a very high capacity for holding contaminants, but I doubt it can hold two or three times the amount that the Mobil 1 M1-302 Filter can.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Like the M1-302 Filter, the Ea024 Filter has a dome end relief valve. The design of the relief valve is very similar to the M1-302 valve, but it appears to be made with better materials. I don't like the position of the valve, since I feel when the relief valve is open, oil will pass by the dirty side of the filter, through the relief valve, and into the engine. Not only will the oil be unfiltered in this scenario, it may actually pick-up additional contaminants as it flows past the dirty side of the filter.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Anti-Drain Back Valve is the preferred silicone type. It is the best ADBV design of any filter I have evaluated, barely beating out the FL-820S ADBV for this “honor.”.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I was somewhat concerned that the base gasket was not properly retained. It was very easily removed despite the presence of a number of crimps around the gaskets OD. Amsoil claims that the gasket is lubricated to ensure easy removal. This appears to be the case.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The other components of the filter are all first rate. The base is very very heavy. The actual filter element end caps are solid. The inner metal core is an unusual and elaborate design that appears intended to direct the oil towards the outlet while imparting a swirling motion. I am not sure what this might do, but it is an interesting detail. Whether effective or not, it certainly gives the filter an air of technological superiority. The filter media was tightly potted in the ends caps. For the other filters I have taken apart, I was able to pull the end caps away from the inner core after I cut through the media. This was not the case with the Ea024 Filter. I had to saw through the inner core to get a look at the relief valve. Many other filters use a simple formed sheet metal spring to provide the force to hold the filter element to the base. The Ea024 filter used a heavy coil spring for this function. This provided a solid seal between the filter element and the base.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]OK, so what's not to like? Well, first and foremost is the cost. Even without shipping this filter cost 60% more than the Mobil 1 M1-302 Filter and nearly five times as much as the FL-820S. The shipping cost for the Ea024 was more than the total cost of the FL-820S. Next, I am just not in love with the filter media. Amsoil claims a 98.7% filter efficiency at 15 microns, and this is very good. But is it necessary? And if this is true (and I have no reason to believe it isn't), it seems likely the media will load up with very small particles very quickly. If this is the case, I can't imagine the filter has enough capacity to go for 25,000 miles without going into bypass mode. And finally I am uneasy about using any filter on my Ford with the relief valve on the dome end of the filter. Ford wants it at the base end, and I believe that is where it should be.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Who might consider this filter? I think it might be a great break-in filter. I could see using it for the first 1000 miles on a freshly rebuilt engine. I could also see it being used by someone who changes oil frequently. I cannot see it being the best filter for extended oil changes, although this is exactly what Amsoil claims it is good for. I could be completely wrong in this impression. It all depends on the characteristics of the media The Ea011 media is unlike any other media I have seen so far, and it may be that it is so much superior, that it can make up for it's lack of volume. The filter is so different I am having a hard time saying it is truly better. However, there is no doubt in my mind that this is one of the most expensive to manufacture filters. Only the Donaldson P550965 and Motorcraft FL-820S filter are close in terms of manufacturing costs.[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Fleetguard LF16002 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
The construction of this filter was almost the same as the Fleetguard LF3681. However, the media was completely different and that makes this a very interesting filter. Fleetguard calls the media "StrataPore." It appears to be similar to the media used in the Amsoil EaO11 Oil Filter.The Fleetguard LF16002 filter has significantly more of this "synthetic" media than the Amsoil filter. Like the Ea011, the media is a pure white color and feels completely different than any other media. It is very soft and flexible, more like a cashmere sweater than the stiff paper-like filter media in the other “premium” filters. Like the EaO11 media, the media is bonded to a mesh which stiffens it considerably. The LF16002 mesh appears to be some sort of plastic, but appears to be similar to the EaO11 mesh otherwise. For the LF16002, the media is both glued and crimped at the joint (as opposed to the EaO11 media which was just crimped). The FL16002 filter has almost 60% more media surface area than the EaO11. So, if you like the EaO11 media, you should love the LF16002.

Like the Ea011 Filter, the LF16002 has a dome end relief valve. The design of the relief valve is very similar to the EaO11 valve. I consider the dome end relief valve a negative, but not a mjor one.

The biggest drawback to the LF16002 FIlter is the nitrile Anti-Drain Back Valve. It is identical to the ADBV used by the cheaper Fleetguard LF3681 Filter. It is not even a particularly good nitrile design. This is the only factor that keeps me from recommending the LF16002 Filter. If you aren't concerned by this, and/or have an engine that is not sensitive to ADBV design, then this filter is worth considering.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Wix 51086[/FONT]http://home.mindspring.com/~cewhite3nc/id8.html[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Wix 51086 Filter can be thought of as a "premium" version of the Pro-Tec 159 Filter. The components are virtually the same size and made by the same processes. Without actually measuring some of the items, you would assume they were the same. The chief upgrades over the Pro-Tec 159 are increased media surface area, thicker media, a silicone anti-drain back valve, and a thicker external can. These upgrades are in concert with a three fold increase in price ($4.50 vs $1.50 for the Pro-Tec 159).

Although the media is thicker, It appears to be of slightly lower quality than the other "premium” filters I have evaluated. As is the case for most other filters, I dislike the location of the relief valve. Locating the relief valve at the top of the element is undesirable because when the filter goes into the bypass mode, it is possible that the oil might remove contaminates from the dirty side of the filter and circulate them back into the engine. Given the large surface area and volume of media, I would expect this filter to have good contaminant holding capacity and a good flow rate.

If the location of the bypass valve doesn't bother you, then this filter should be acceptable. However, it cost over $1 more than the Motorcraft FL-820S, has an inferior relief valve location, and appears to have an inferior quality filter media (but it does have a lot of it). I wouldn't be upset if a shop used this filter on my Ford, but I wouldn't buy it if the Motorcraft filter was available.
[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Mobil 1 M1-302 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This filter, along with the Bosch 3410 and K&N HP-3002 are all closely related. It is almost identical to the K&N HP-3002. The Bosch version has a different relief valve, but otherwise appears to be the same.

I was disappointed in the Mobil 1 M1-302 filter. It cost three times as much as the Motorcraft FL-820S and, in my opinion, was not a superior product. The relief valve is at the dome end of the filter. This is opposite from the Ford preferred location. Since the relief valve is at the top, if the filter goes into bypass mode, the oil will pass by the "dirty" side of filter material while it is circulating. This means that not only will the oil be unfiltered, it might actually become re-contaminated with particles from the dirty side of the filter. I also feel the anti-drain back valve is slightly inferior to the FL-820S design. The total volume of filter media is only slightly greater than for the FL-820S. The filter media is thinner, but the surface area is 1.4 times greater. This should allow for a higher flow rate / lower pressure drop. If the contaminants are primarily on the surface of the filter media (my assumption), then the filter capacity should be somewhat greater, but I can't see how it can be more than 25% greater. I cannot verify Mobil's claim that the filter media is much more efficient. Mobil claims the filter has a 99.2% multi-pass efficiency (at what microns rating?). Motorcraft only claims a 80% single pass efficiency at 20 microns. You cannot directly compare these claims. To my eye, the filter media looks to be the same material, or at least very similar. I would think the thicker FL-820S media would compensate for the supposed superior properties of the M210 media.

I personally would not use this filter on my vehicle, even if it cost the same as the Motorcraft FL-820S. I might change my mind if I got proof that the Mobil 1 filter media was far superior to the FL-820S media. As it is, I don't think it is. I certainly won’t agree that the Mobil 1 M1-302 Filter can be worth three times as much as the Motorcraft FL-820S Filter.


[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]K&N HP-3002 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Almost everything I had to say about the Mobil 1 M1-302 Filter (and most of what I said about the Bosch 3410) applies to the K&N HP-3002 Filter. I can only detect three differences between the Mobil M1-302 and the K&N HP-3002. [/FONT]


  • [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*]The HP-3002 cost $2.11 more than the M1-302
    [*]The HP-3002 has a 1" hex spot welded to the top of the can
    [*]The HP-3002 is painted white vs. the black color of the M1-302    [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Bosch shares the same differences as the M1-302 plus it has a unique relief valve design and is even cheaper than the M1-302. As far as the actual filter element is concerned, they are the same. Same parts, same media, same ADBV, etc. I find this somewhat surprising since they quote slightly different specifications. For instance, Mobil claims the M1-302 is 99.2% efficient at 25 microns, while K&N claims the HP-3002 is 85.2% efficient at 10 microns and 99.0% efficient at 20 microns. I guess the HP-3002 would be 99.2% efficient at 25 microns as well. They also claim slightly different relief valve settings (9.5 psi for the HP-3002 vs. 11-17 for the M1-302). Despite this, the relief valves appear to be identical. The springs could be different. I didn't check this, but they look the same.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]So would I buy this filter? I can't see why I would pay over two dollars more for a filter that is the same as the M1-302 - especially when I already said I wouldn't buy the M1-302 because of the relief valve location. I suppose if you have an application where the nut on the top is crucial, this filter would be a good choice. As for me, I don't have that sort of need.[/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Bosch 3410 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is closely related to the Mobil M1-210 and K&N HP-2010 Filters. The media appears to be the same material and in approximately the same amount. The anti-drain back valve is the same. The base is the same. The lower end cap of the filter element is the same. The filter has one major difference - it has an unusual pressure relief valve. There are a series of small holes in the upper filter element end cap. The filter retainer is sized to cover these holes. In operation when the pressure differential reaches a predetermined level, the spring lifts away from the holes, and allows oil to bypass the filter media. I cannot believe that the pressure setting of this design is consistent from filter to filter. There are too many tolerances involved. I also don't like dome end relief valves for the reason I have stated in the discussion of several other filters. One other minor difference in this filter is the method used to crimp the can to the base. There is a raised flange for this filter. The K&N and Mobil 1 filters did not have a raised flange. I believe this is related to the need to tightly control the assembled height of the filter because of the relief valve design.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I consider the odd relief valve to be a major disadvantage of this filter. However, the price for this filter is much lower than the price of either the K&N HP-2010 or the Mobil M1-210. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]On the box, Bosch claims this filter removes 98% of engine impurities, but there is no micron rating mentioned, so this is a meaningless statement. According to specs I have seen, this is a 20 micron filter and is rated 98% efficient at 20 microns (single pass). On the box, Bosch also claims that the filter has 42% more filtering area than conventional filters. I am not sure which conventional filters they are comparing this filter to. It does have 33% more surface area than the Fram PH2, but it is not a leader in this metric. Bosch also claims the filter media is up to 30 percent thicker than conventional filter. Once again, I am not sure which conventional filter they are using for the comparison. Only the Pro-Tec 159 and Wix 51372 Filters have thinner media.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]If you love the K&N Filter or the Mobil M1-210 Filter, then you should consider buying the Bosch 3410 instead. None of these filters has a good relief valve design or relief valve location. Otherwise they appear to be the same, and the Bosch Filter is much cheaper. And in my opinion, they are all inferior to the cheaper Motorcraft FL-820S.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Purolator Premium Plus L24651 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is a reduced cost version of the Purolator PureOne PL24651. The basic construction is the similar except for the following changes[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
  1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*]Thinner Media (0,24" vs 0.030" for the PL24651)
    [*]Nitrile Anti-Drain Back Valve (Silicone for the PL24651)
    [*]Slightly thinner filter can material
    [*]Lower cost ($3.24 vs. $5.88 for the PL24651)[/FONT]    [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The dome end relief valve and nitrile anti-drain back valve are negative features of this filter. So why would anyone pick this filter over the higher quality PL24651? One word - cost. Buying the L24651 filter because it is cheaper is a mistake. The Motorcraft FL-820S costs about the same and is a significantly better filter[/FONT][/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Fleetguard LF3681 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is a not exactly like any of the other filters. It may be produced by Fleetguard and not purchased from another manufacturer. It has some characteristics in common with both Purolater and Wix Filters, but it also has significant differences as well. There is nothing remarkable about this filter. The media is simialr to that used in the FL-820S. It has a nitrile ADBV like the Purolator [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]L24651 Oil Filter. The relief valve is similar to the WIX type, as is the element retaining spring. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The dome end relief valve and nitrile anti-drain back valve are negative features of this filter. I don't see any reason to go out of your way to purchase this filter. The Motorcraft FL-820S costs less and is a significantly better filter[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Hastings LF110 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]According to the manufacturer, The Hasting LF110, Baldwin B329, and Casite CF-110 Oil Filters are the same except for labeling. Bladwin was by far the most accommodating when it came to providing specifications for their products (for the record, of the companies contacted, ACDelco was the worst - they treated everything but the color of the can as proprietary).[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This is a well made filter, but in my opinion, suffers from some significant flaws. This is the only filter that included a separate part between the anti-drain back valve and the filter element. I am not sure why they decided on this design. Perhaps it allows for additional flexibility in the design of the ADBV or allows an alternate relief valve design or different filter elements. This plastic connector fit tightly in the ADBV, but not particularly tightly in the filter element. I am concerned that it might provide an additional path for dirty oil to bypass the filter element. The media in this filter was among the thickest media of any of the filters I have evaluated (0.037”) but the surface area of the media was only about the same as the Motorcraft FL-820S. The thick media and limited surface area may limit the flow capacity of this filter. The manufacturer rates this filter at 23 microns. Even at that micron size, the filter is only claimed to be 76% efficient. The filter is claimed to have excellent contaminant holding capacity (14.5 grams, vs. only 8 grams for the Motorcraft FL-820S). Of the filters with a dome end relief valve, this filter has the nicest looking relief valve. Unfortunately the ADBV is nitrile (but well made).[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I rate this filter just behind the Purolator Premium Plus L24651 Oil Filter. They are very close. I would actually give the [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Hastings[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] filter the edge in quality of construction, but the Purolator has better media. Who would buy this filter? I think this would be an acceptacle filter for an older small block Ford, particularly if you aren’t careful about changing oil regularly. I would not use it on any of the newer Ford OHC engines. I am confident that you could find this filter at a lower price than my purchase price, but it will be hard to find at traditional auto parts stores.[/FONT][/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Pro-Tec 159 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is a reduced cost version of the Wix 51372 Oil Filter. If you don't include shipping, the Pro-Tec 159 Oil Filter is the cheapest FL-820S substitute filter I have seen. At $1.50 from Rock Auto, it has to make you wonder why all the other filters cost so much. You won't confuse this filter with one of the premium filters, but it has all the same components as the most expensive filter I've evaluated, the Amsoil Ea011. Clearly many of the parts are of a lower quality level but they are all there and in the same place. The filter media is a weak link. It is easily torn oiled paper. On the other hand, there is a lot of it, at least as far as surface area is concerned. Despite the large surface area, I cannot imagine it has good contaminant holding capacity. Other "less expensive" features are the thin case material, the nitrile anti-drain back valve, and the dome end relief valve. Although the comparable components in the Wix 51372 Filter are similar, the Wix version has better quality components - more and thicker filter media; silicone anti-drain back valve; thicker case.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]So who would buy this filter? I suspect anyone who gets an oil change at Jiffy Lube is getting a filter very much like this one. I suppose it is better than nothing or the Wal*Mart ST2.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]ProLine PPL-24651 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is a private label version of a Purolator filter sold by Pep Boys. It has reduced cost features when compared to the Purolator PureOne PL24651 and the Purolator Premium Plus L24651. The basic construction is the similar except for the following changes:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
  1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*]Thinner Media (0.24" vs 0.030" for the PL24651 and 0.24" for the L24651 )
    [*]Nitrile Anti-Drain Back Valve (Silicone for the PL24651 / Nitrile for the L24651)
    [*]Lower cost ($2.99 vs $3.24 for the L24651 and $5.88 for the PL24651)
    [*]Shorter lenght of media (78" vs 93" for the L24651 and PL24651)    [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The dome end relief valve and nitrile anti-drain back valve are negative features of this filter. So why would anyone pick this filter over the higher quality PL24651 or the slightly more expensive L24551? Cost is the only reason. If you are willing to go cheap and buy the Purolator L24651 Filter then you might as well buy this filter or the Advance AA2 instead.There is less total filter media in the PPL-24651 and AA2 than in the L24651, but as long as you are changing your oil every 3000 miles, I don't think this will be a problem. The FL-820S is still a better choice than this filter even if cost is a major consideration.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]C.G.Enterprises Viper 2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] This filter is a private label filter made in China by an unknow manufacturer. If the can was not labeled "Made in China" it would be easy to mistake this filter for a private label filter made by Purolator or Wix. The only odd thing about this filter was the density of the media. Although the media appearance is similar to other lower cost filters with cellulose media, the density is much greater. I believe this is a bad thing, but without flow rate information and filtering efficiency information, it is hard to know for sure. I see no reason to go out of your way to purchase this filter - even if you live in Canada.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Advance Auto AA2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter is another version of a Purolator filter. It has reduced cost features when compared to the Purolator PureOne PL24651 and the Purolator Premium Plus L24651. The basic construction is the similar except for the following changes:[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
  1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*]Thinner Media (0.23" vs 0.030" for the PL24651 and 0.24" for the L24651 )
    [*]Nitrile Anti-Drain Back Valve (Silicone for the PL24651 / Nitrile for the L24651)
    [*]FIlter Can has a grip coating on the outside (all over, not just the end)
    [*]Lower cost ($2.88 vs $3.24 for the L24651 and $5.88 for the PL24651)
    [*]Inner Core is like the Motorcraft FL-820S, not like the L24651 and PL24651
    [*]Shorter lenght of media (80" vs 93" for the L24651 and PL24651)    [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The dome end relief valve and nitrile anti-drain back valve are negative features of this filter. So why would anyone pick this filter over the higher quality PL24651 or the slightly more expensive L24551? Cost is the only reason. If you are willing to go cheap and buy the Purolator L24651 Filter then you might as well buy this filter instead.There is less total filter media in the AA2 than in the L24651, but as long as you are changing your oil every 3000 miles, I don't think this will be a problem. The FL-820S is still a better choice than this filter even if cost is a major consideration.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Fram TG2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Fram TG2 is an upgraded and more expensive variation of the Fram PH2. The changes are:[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
  1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
    [*][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Silicone Anti-drain back valve (same design, different material) [/FONT]
    [*][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Improved filter media. The media is thicker, longer, and, according to the advertising, made from a "combination glass and synthetic media." [/FONT]
    [*][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The pressure relief valve includes a wire mesh screen dome over the pressure relief valve. Fram claims this provides back-up filtration during cold operation. The mesh is so open it looks of dubious value to me.[/FONT]    [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This filter has the same cheap looking paper end caps as the PH2 that I believe are prone to leaking unfiltered oil past the media. I also think the anti-drain back valve is likely to let oil by-pass the filter element in many cases. And like most of the other filters, the relief valve is on the dome end. If you are willing to buy a filter of this quality, don't go half-way; buy the $1.50 Pro-Tec 159. The Pro-Tec 159’s filter media is not as good, but there is less chance of unfiltered oil by-passing the filter element.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Fram PH2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This is the "Leading National Brand" filter that other manufacturers like to compare their filter to. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I have a hard time figuring out where to place this filter in the pantheon of FL-820S-like filters. The filter media is clearly superior to the Pro-Tec 159, but the PH2's paper end caps, cheap feeling anti-drain back valve, and weird relief valve are inferior to the comparable components in the much cheaper ProTec 159. The paper end caps are at least better bonded to the filter media than the Wal*Mart ST2's fabric end caps. And the Fram PH2 has separate anti-drain back and relief valves instead of the combo valve in the ST2. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Fram claims a 96% single pass and a 94% multi-pass filter efficiency for the PH2, but since they don't provide the micron rating, I have no idea what that means. I am sure it is 100% efficient at removing marbles. (Note - The efficiency rating is actually based on measurements of the larger PH8A).[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The relief valve is different from anything else I have seen (except for the Fram TG2). It is mounted in the top retainer leaf spring. It fits the upper paper end cap relatively well, but I believe there is some leakage of dirty oil around the relief valve body during normal operation. Likewise, I suspect there is some leakage past the paper end cap at the base end. The paper end caps are relatively flexible, as is the ADBV. I believe that they will deform enough to allow some leakage under normal operating conditions.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The filter can includes flats for a cap wrench and an anti-slip coating, which are nice features, but they don't effect the actual filtering performance. It also appears the base gasket includes a lubricant which is a nice feature. Unfortunately it is only loosely retained to the base.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Since the Fram PH2 filter cost more than a Motorcraft FL-820S and is clearly inferior, I can't see any reason to purchase it. This filter is proof that advertising works![/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Wal*Mart ST2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Wal*Mart ST2 Filter along with the STP S2 Filter and the [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Filter are three of the cheapest filters you can buy both in price and quality. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]There are lots of things I don't like. Number one on my list of unacceptable features is the combined anti-drain back valve / pressure relief valve. The valve is made from nitrile, which is not acceptable to me. The relief valve is likely to be inconsistent in operation, with widely varying pressure settings. At least the relief valve is at the preferred base end of the filter. The open plastic cylinder does not provide adequate support to the media. I would be concerned that the media might collapse it the filter loaded up with contaminants. If the media doesn't actually collapse, there is a real danger that the filter media will separate from the fabric end caps. I found it easy to separate the media from the end caps. The better quality filters (including the Pro-Tec 159) have the filter media tightly potted in the end caps. By comparison, the ST2 filter's media is barely attached to the end caps at all.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Wal*Mart claims that the filter traps two times the dirt of the leading national brand (I assume they mean Fram). I have no idea what this means. The filter media appears to be cellulose (and hardly different than the FL-820S or M210). It has a surface area between the FL-820S and the M210 and a similar total volume of media. The media in the ST2 does have a greater surface area and more total volume than the media in the Fram PH2, so it is reasonable to expect that it will be able to hold a greater contaminant load, but I don't think it can hold two times as much (maybe 20% more?).[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I can't recommend this filter. I suppose if you have an old car on its last legs, or you plan on trading cars every 70,000 miles, this filter is good enough. But for just $1.28 more, you can move up to the FL-820S. I strongly urge you to do so.[/FONT][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]STP S2 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] The STP S2 Filter and the nearly identical Wal*Mart ST2 and the [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Oil Filters are three of the cheapest filters you can buy both in price and quality. Since the Wal*Mart version is the cheaper one, I can't see any reason to buy the STP S2. [/FONT][/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Everything I dislike about the Wal*Mart ST2 applies to the STP S2 as well. Number one on my list of unacceptable features is the combined anti-drain back valve / pressure relief valve. The valve is made from nitrile, which is not acceptable to me. The relief valve is likely to be inconsistent in operation, with widely varying pressure settings. At least the relief valve is at the preferred base end of the filter. The open plastic cylinder does not provide adequate support to the media. I would be concerned that the media might collapse it the filter loaded up with contaminants. If the media doesn't actually collapse, there is a real danger that the filter media will separate from the fabric end caps. I found it easy to separate the media from the end caps. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]STP claims that the "Micropore" element traps damaging particles as small as 1/1000 mm. This claim is misleading. 1/1000 mm = 1 micron. I am sure a 1 micron particle will occasionally be trapped in the filter, but this cannot be the actual micron rating of the filter. Filter manufactures that disclose the micron rating of their filters, usually claim 10 to 20 microns. I am sure that the filtering efficiency of the STP S2 at 1 micron is probably in the single digits.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I can't recommend this filter. If you are willing to use a filter this cheaply made, get the Wal*Mart ST2 instead, or better yet, the Pro-Tec 159.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

And the bottom of the list is good old AC Delco!


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Oil Filter[/FONT]​
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] The ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Oil Filters is for all practical purposes identical to the STP S2 and Wal*Mart ST2 Filters. Since the Wal*Mart version is the cheaper one, I can't see any reason to buy the ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Oil Filter. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Everything I dislike about the Wal*Mart ST2 applies to the ACDelco Duraguard PF1250 Oil Filter as well. Number one on my list of unacceptable features is the combined anti-drain back valve / pressure relief valve. The valve is made from nitrile, which is not acceptable to me. The relief valve is likely to be inconsistent in operation, with widely varying pressure settings. At least the relief valve is at the preferred base end of the filter. The open plastic cylinder does not provide adequate support to the media. I would be concerned that the media might collapse it the filter loaded up with contaminants. If the media doesn't actually collapse, there is a real danger that the filter media will separate from the fabric end caps. I found it easy to separate the media from the end caps. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I can't recommend this filter. If you are willing to use a filter this cheaply made, get the Wal*Mart ST2 instead, or better yet, the Pro-Tec 159.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

And a little more reading if you haven't had enough yet! :coffee:

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Filter Scoring System[/FONT]​
spacer.gif
mkg_cleanslate3_2.gif
spacer.gif
spacer.gif
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]In addition to my “opinion” rating of the filters, I am attempting to rate the filters based on a scoring system. This is also opinion based, but it provides details to the reasons for my opinions of the different filters. The scores are generated by breaking the filters down into various factors that influence the overall rating and then weighting the factors to achieve an overall score. Here is how I see the various factors and how they figure into the overall rating.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Cost – 20 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This is straight forward. This factor is worth 20 points. I subtracted the cost of the filter from 20 to calculate the score for this factor. The highest score goes to the Pro-Tec 159 (18.5) and the lowest to the Amsoil Ea011 (4.25). The Motorcraft FL-820S scored 16.72. You might chose a lower rating for this factor, or dismiss it altogether if you want the best filter regardless of cost.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Filter Can Quality – 3 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]There is very little difference in the various filter cans. And this is a relatively unimportant category. All of the filters were either a 3 or a 2. In most cases, if the can used 0.020” thick material, I rated it a 3. If it was less, I rated it a 2. Even though the Amsoil Ea011 Filter had a 0.020” thick can, I rated it a 2 because it had no features to make installation easier (no flutes, flats, or easily gripped surface). The FL-820S scored 3 points in this category. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Base Gasket Design – 3 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This is another minor category. Most filters were awarded either 1 point or 2 points. I gave the Denso 150-1014 3 points because of its innovative gasket design. All the other filters used similar square section O rings. If the O ring included a lubricant, I awarded the filter 2 points in the category. Otherwise it got 1 point. The FL-820S scored 1 point in this category.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Inner Core Design – 3 Points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I preferred the inner core design of the Purolator, Wix, and Amsoil filters and gave them all 3 points. The other filters that used a metal inner core (including the Motorcraft FL-820S) got 2 points. The Champion labs filters that used a plastic inner core got 1 point.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Retainer Spring Design – 3 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I prefer the coil spring type retainer. I feel it will be more consistent in providing consistent pressure on the filter element and give the best seal between the filter element and base. Filters that use a coil spring retainer got 3 points. All the others (including the FL-820S) got 2 points.[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]
[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif][/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Anti-Drain Back Valve Design – 15 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]I consider this a very important factor for Ford Overhead Cam Engines. It is probably less important for the old OHV engines. If you ahve an OHV engine you might want to drop this factor from 15 to 10 points. I rated the ADBVs based on material and design. The Amsoil EaO11 Filter had the best design (in my opinion) and I gave it 15 points. The FL-820S had the next best design and got 14 points. Most of the other “premium” filters with silicone ADBVs were given 11 or 12 points. The Donaldson P550965 had a ADBV similar in design to the Amsoil EaO11but it was molded from nitrile instead of silicone. Therefore I gave it only 10 points. The filters that used the combination ADB and Relief Valve design (Wal*Mart and STP) got the lowest score of 3 points.

[/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Relief Valve Design – 10 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This is a hard category for me to score. All the filters I have evaluated, except for the Motorcraft FL-820S, have a dome end relief valve design. The FL-820S relief valve is far more elaborate and expensive than the relief valve design used by any of the other filters. So why does Ford go to all this trouble for a relatively inexpensive filter, while all of the other premium filters, including filters that cost 4 times as much make do with a dome end relief valve? I don’t know the answer. I do believe the base end design is the best (well except for the cheaply made combo valves). Interestingly, several of the other manufacturers admit that the base end design might be required by some manufacturers. It seems to me that Ford, by the design of their OEM Filter, is making this a requirement. I can only assume it is not written into the product specifications, since all of the premium filters are claimed to meet OEM specifications. I gave the FL-820S filter 10 points in this category. The filters with the coil spring loaded dome end filter element relief valves got 5 or 6 points. The Fram filters got 3 and 4 points (the TG2 got 4 because of the screen – I am not sure this is justified). The Bosch filter got 3 because I just don’t like the design. The cheap filters with the combined ADB and relief valves got 2 points. If you don’t think the relief valve design or location is particularly important, you might want to rescore this category.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Media - total of 40 points, broken down into four 10 point sub-categories[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Now we come to the most important categories. These are the ones that actually relate to the filter media. I don’t have the means to actually test the media; therefore this is a beauty contest more than an actual performance contest. This is the only way I can rate the . I love to hear a suggestion on a better rating method. Rather than have one overall score for the media, I have broken it down into 4 sub-categories worth 10 points each – media volume, media surface area, filter element construction quality, and filter media quality. Therefore the media represents 40% of the total score. This might not seem like enough since the primary purpose of the oil filter is to filter the oil, but the filters don’t differ greatly in the other categories, so the media categories taken together are the deciding factors.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Media Volume – 10 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This was a straight forward calculation. The filter with the most total media, the Ford Racing CM-6731-FL820 FIlter was awarded 10 points. The other filters were award points based on their total media volume compared to this. The FL-820S got 8 points. The Amsoil EaO11 was only awarded 5 points. I am worried this comparison is not fair to the EaO11 Filter. All of the other filters had media that was either cellulose or cellulose blended with “synthetic” fibers. It may be that the Amsoil media is so different, a direct comparison of volume is irrelevant.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Media Surface Area – 10 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]More surface area equates to higher flow rates and more contaminant holding ability. The Ford Racing CM-6731-FL820 FIlter was awarded 10 points in this category since it had the greatest surface area. The other filters were award points based on their total media surface area compared to this. The FL-820S was awarded 6 points in this category. Again, because of the unusual media, I am not sure I am being fair to the Amsoil EaO11 Filter (it scored only 4 points).[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Filter Element Construction Quality – 10 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]The Amsoil EaO11 Filter has a very well constructed filter element and I awarded it 10 points. The Donaldson filter element was the same as the Amsoil filter except for the media, so I awarded it 10 points as well. The FL-820S was slightly better made (mostly because of the interface to the ADBV) than the “premium” filters that used metal end caps and was awarded 8 points. All of the other filters that used metal end caps and a glued media seam were awarded 7 points. The Denso filter also was awarded 7 points despite using a metal clip to make the media joint. The Fram filters were awarded 4 points and this was generous given the low quality appearance of the paper end caps and the use of a metal clip to make the media joint. The Wal*Mart and STP filters were awarded 3 points. I just don’t like the poorly bonded fabric end caps.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]Filter Media Quality – 10 points[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]This was strictly my opinion. I liked the Amsoil media and awarded it 10 points. I awarded the FL-820S 8 points. The “premium” filters all got 7 to 9 points. The lowest rated fitler was the Pro-Tec 159 which got 4 points.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]And the Winner is…..[/FONT]

http://home.earthlink.net/~cewhite3nc/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/fl820s_x_ref_scores.xls

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif]For the Total Score (without cost) column, I just removed the cost factor and normalized the result to 100 points. Clearly the Amsoil filter was hurt by its high cost when compared to the FL-820S. but even if you ignore cost, I scored the FL-820S slightly higher. This is entirely due to the small size of the filter element in the Amsoil EaO11 Filter. The filter media may be much better than the media in the FL-820s, but is it 60% better? I don’t have an answer. But, until I see an independent test proving that this media is far better than the conventional media used by the other filter manufacturers, I can’t justify spending 4 times as much (or more) for the Amsoil EaO11 Filter. If you really like the syntheic media used in the Amsoil EaO11 Filter and can live with a nitrile anti-drain back valve, then the Fleetguard LF16002 might be worth a look. It appears to use a lot more of a similar media and costs half as much. Unfortunately the LF16002 has a nitrile anti-drain back valve, and not even a particularly well designed one.[/FONT]
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

Wholy Crap Batman!

Lots of good info and I was wondering how there were so many new posts since the last time I was on this site.
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

Well this is a subject that if often talked about and there is never good information at hand when I need to show someone so I figured I'd put it on here so I can find it and use it as a reference! If you guys know the part numbers of the filters you use let me know and I'll change it in the list so guys know the correct part numbers. I just did the Mobil One and K&N Filters. Plus I really want to stress to these guys who insist on running an AC Delco on these cars that it is not a good filter to run just because it says AC Delco!
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

One thing that I found weird is I have always run the KN 3002 on my TTA and have never had any problems, until recently I decided to switch to the Napa Gold 1086. Why is it that the Napa filter is about 1/2 the size of the KN or the original ACDelcos?
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

1/2 the size? The filter I run is about as large as you can physically fit. You must have gotten the wrong one...HALF the size?!?
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

Yep, I used to run the Napa 1086 on my car too. The AC Delco was like ~5 1/2" tall and the Napa about ~3 1/2" tall. No clearance problems with the Napa. John Pearcy did a comparison a LONG time ago and said the Napa some how had the same amount of filtering media. Anybody have that old info?
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

im running the mobile 1 filter, just off whatever was for the application in the book at the auto parts store, no rubbing or anything, its doing the job nicely
 
Re: Oil filter comparisons. What filter should I use in my TTA you ask? Step inside..

Funny how the Napa filters are at the bottom of the list and the Wix at the top as Wix is the manufacturer of the Napa filters ... I run the Napa Gold 1086 as well on mine and is very pleased with it. Only time I had a AC Delco on it was for the photo's I took of my engine when freshly built but then swapped to the Napa one when I put it all back in the car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top