extra fuel filtration help

[BIGNASTY]

Dont want to be a wise***but were are you gentlemen buying your fuel that you would need this much filtration

 

[AH64ID]

Dont want to be a wise***but were are you gentlemen buying your fuel that you would need this much filtration

Anywhere. . The HPCR runs up to 23K psi stock, even the smallest piece of contaminant does damage at 23K psi. Bosch wants a min of 5um on their system, but 2um is better. The OE setup is 7um, so call for an improvement. The Baldwin PF7977 is a drop in 5um filter, but many of us just want more. Its a cheap setup compared to a 6K fuel system.

 

[rbattelle]

It does still filter some particles at 2um, its 94% at 2um, where the Cat is 98. 7% at 2um. So there is some room for improvement.

At what flow rate? The Stanadyne filters are >99% for 2um at 45 gph.



Ryan

 

[SShafranko]

The only reason i removed the canister is because of the restrictive banjo fittings. I was very hesitant to do so mainly because i lost the heater. I was going to address this also in the future. Now if i install my fuel canister back what do i put in place of the banjos? Are you saying to run a filter in the stock canister and install the GDP kit after the canister giving me a total of three filters? Which is fine by me if it works.



I do have a pressure gauge and it is coming from the CP3 port.

 

[AH64ID]

The only reason i removed the canister is because of the restrictive banjo fittings. I was very hesitant to do so mainly because i lost the heater. I was going to address this also in the future. Now if i install my fuel canister back what do i put in place of the banjos? Are you saying to run a filter in the stock canister and install the GDP kit after the canister giving me a total of three filters? Which is fine by me if it works.



I do have a pressure gauge and it is coming from the CP3 port.

You can eliminate all the the restriction with the proper 90* fittings.



Yes run the stock filter, then the GDP after for the ultimate in filtration. Just adding the OE cansiter back with a Baldwin PF7977 would be pretty good as well. . Just depends on how far you wanted to go.

 

[AH64ID]

At what flow rate? The Stanadyne filters are >99% for 2um at 45 gph.

Ryan

Those specs are at 59. 95 GPH.

Cat won't publish their specs (as they are not in the cross-reference business), but the Fleetguard cross to the Cat 1R-0750 is 99. 87GPH. So that is what I assume the cat is, at least (remember BIG engines making BIG power)

 

[TCDiesel]

I know CAT Specs, 2mic on any of their Re-label filters is not even close to what you want for (HPCR),I am currently contracting to CAT until the project is completed, so I am on their payroll I'm limited to sharing info.

 

[AH64ID]

I know CAT Specs, 2mic on any of their Re-label filters is not even close to what you want for (HPCR),I am currently contracting to CAT until the project is completed, so I am on their payroll I'm limited to sharing info.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? Can you elaborate.

 

[TCDiesel]

I'm not sure what you mean by this? Can you elaborate.

All of CAT filters are spec to Cat Engines. . NONE are currently HPCR. . AT present all 6. 0L and smaller are made by Perkins. 6. 2L and up are vendor, manufactured and assemble By CAT throughout the world.



Caterpillar is well known for great products, that does not mean everything THAT SAYS CAT is the best, My preferred Filter is Zinga.

 

[TCDiesel]

Check this chart out http://zinga.com/zImages/SPINON_AQUAZORB.pdf



AE-03AZL Rating Means 50% of 5 mic / 95% of 21 mic / 98. 7% of 23 mic, on the 1st pass, Now look at the chart and see how the pressure effects the Ratings

 

[AH64ID]

All of CAT filters are spec to Cat Engines. . NONE are currently HPCR. . AT present all 6. 0L and smaller are made by Perkins. 6. 2L and up are vendor, manufactured and assemble By CAT throughout the world.



Caterpillar is well known for great products, that does not mean everything THAT SAYS CAT is the best, My preferred Filter is Zinga.

No there are no CAT HPCR engine, but some of their HEUI run very high pressure. Cat still lists their filter at 2um absolute, and that's the important part, not the intended injection pressure.

Check this chart out http://zinga.com/zImages/SPINON_AQUAZORB.pdf



AE-03AZL Rating Means 50% of 5 mic / 95% of 21 mic / 98. 7% of 23 mic, on the 1st pass, Now look at the chart and see how the pressure effects the Ratings

What makes them so special? The best filter on that page is 23um absolute, where the Cat is 2um at a Beta 75.



Not trying to be an ***, just trying to figure out why you consider them better. I am always interested in filter info.

 

[TCDiesel]

What makes them so special? The best filter on that page is 23um absolute, where the Cat is 2um at a Beta 75.



What % of 2mic? 10% 20%? on the 1st pass @ what Pressure. Got to go ,Be back after 4pm CST



Your not being an ***

 

[AH64ID]

What % of 2mic? 10% 20%? on the 1st pass @ what Pressure. Got to go ,Be back after 4pm CST

The Cat is 98. 7% of 2um particles. The filters you linked are 98. 7% of 23um particles. That is all single pass specs (the only company I know of that does multi-pass on fuel filters is Baldwin).



There are only two filters I have found, not saying there aren't more, that are absolute (98. 7%, or Beta 75) at 2um. That is the Cat high efficiency series and the Donaldson crosses for those filters. Everything else that advertises 2um isn't absolute.



I did some searching on the Zinga site. They do have some 4um filters at 98. 7% efficiency. The one's you linked were f/w seps. Well not really seps as they just absorb and cannot be drained (not sure I like that).



I did notice that their filters all say not to use on internal combustion engines. . Its that physically ON them, or WITH them?



Here is some cat info http://www.cat.com/cda/files/1386244/7/pehp9522_01.pdf

 

[rbattelle]

There are only two filters I have found, not saying there aren't more, that are absolute (98. 7%, or Beta 75) at 2um. That is the Cat high efficiency series and the Donaldson crosses for those filters. Everything else that advertises 2um isn't absolute.

Stanadyne is.

In principle I agree with TWest that we should be careful deciding that any given filter is appropriate based only on the particle rating and efficiency. I think flow rate and/or pressure differential play into it, although it's not clear to me exactly how those values change the particle rating.

But TWest, I got the impression that the chart you posted listed max operating pressure rather than max pressure at which the stated particle retention size holds true. Maybe I'm wrong on that.

Ryan

 

[AH64ID]

Stanadyne is.

Those look like nice setups, thou there verbage has me confused. It talks about particle retention, no filtration. And what really catches my eye is that it's more efficient at retaining 2um particles that 5um particles. . and that doesn't seem right. Also the ISO they list isn't one I have seen before on fuel filtration specs, the one I generally see is J1985. It just makes me wonder why they are different (and how they can hold more small particles than big ones)

 

[TCDiesel]

J1985 is easily manipulated, If any filter is base on that standard I would not trust it, Even Cummins has move up to J905 which is not even being close to the forgiveness of J1985,None of Zinga filters are certified for Tank to engine use. Good Hydroscopic media does not allow any moisture through it, it retains it until it will not allow any liquids by, so they are equal to the most High tech water separators, most of the gravity style separators are not adequate.

Last time I mention to Zinga what's the reason they has not certified their products for internal combustion engines. . they did not want to hassle with it. . almost all of their business is factory or auxiliary installations…I use AE-03AZL on my auxiliary tank, than pump to factory Tank. . Zinga or equivalent is certified for Pumps. Fuel station could be using this type or equal at the pump, Every pump that I have ever seen open or being changed are using the cheapest junk made by companies that are known for the lowest quality in the world . Yep the station owner(s) would rather spin on a $6. 00 piece of garbage media then spend $25. 00 to $35. 00 on a Zinga or equivalent that will require changing twice as often. For those who are content with factory filtration save your receipts and try and fill consistently at the same fuel stop. . that way you will at least have something to fall back on ,if you decide to take action against the supplier. OP its very disturbing to see this happen to you. . 1mills myself and others see this far too often. The outlook does not look promising for The Diesel engine maker(s) in the non-commercial use if proper filtration is not controlled soon, Who want a possible bill for 4/6k that can be avoided by a $35. 00 filter at the Pump.

I hear ya on the ratings & standards it's a understatement to say they are confusing .

 

[AH64ID]

Interesting about J1985. . When did Cummins change? All the sheets I get from Fleetguard on filtration are J1985, as are the OE requirements by Dodge. .

 

[TCDiesel]

If I understand correctly J1985 addresses the solid matter only ,So you could achieve a 2mic rating at 20GPH @ 2PSI, J905 addresses the restriction vs flow and capacity vs restriction @ ( )Pressure ,So the higher the Pressure lower the filtration, Now at higher volume with greater flow also will lower the filtration. J1985 could be misleading without using J905 Performance standard or equivalent . Bottom line it's up to the end users responsibility to check methods or requirements.

 

[SShafranko]

OK guys one more question. I want to get my fuel system buttoned up by the end of this week. I think i am set on one of two things: Air Dog changing to the Cat filters AH recommended and keeping the stock fuel canister with the Baldwin 7 filter and replacing all banjo bolts with open fitings, or Air Dog with Cat filters eliminating the stock canister and installing the 2 mic. GDP filter and water seperator set up after the AD. I don't think i need all three unless someone thinks i do(let me know). Which one should i do and why? Thank you very much you all have been a great help as usual. I love this place!

 

[AH64ID]

If I understand correctly J1985 addresses the solid matter only ,So you could achieve a 2mic rating at 20GPH @ 2PSI, J905 addresses the restriction vs flow and capacity vs restriction @ ( )Pressure ,So the higher the Pressure lower the filtration, Now at higher volume with greater flow also will lower the filtration. J1985 could be misleading without using J905 Performance standard or equivalent . Bottom line it's up to the end users responsibility to check methods or requirements.

Yes I agree on the pressure vs flow... . But more flow means more pressure since psi = flow x restriction.



Now I am not 100% certain, but with Fleetguard they list a rated flow and a J1985 filtration spec. . So wouldn't that meant he spec is met at the rated flow? Like the OEM fuel filter on our truck is rated at 7um absolute, rated flow is 59. 97 GPH, so my guess is up to 59. 97 GPH the filter is capable of removing 98. 7%, or more, of 7um or larger particles.



The flow thing is another problem I have with the AD filters, their f/w sep filter is only rated at 19. xx GPH, and the final filter is 59. 97 GPH. . yet its a 95 or 150 GPH pump. . Really tells me that there was no research done when selecting the filters.

OK guys one more question. I want to get my fuel system buttoned up by the end of this week. I think i am set on one of two things: Air Dog changing to the Cat filters AH recommended and keeping the stock fuel canister with the Baldwin 7 filter and replacing all banjo bolts with open fitings, or Air Dog with Cat filters eliminating the stock canister and installing the 2 mic. GDP filter and water seperator set up after the AD. I don't think i need all three unless someone thinks i do(let me know). Which one should i do and why? Thank you very much you all have been a great help as usual. I love this place!

They both have their advantages. The OE canister gets you another 5um filter and a water sep rated at 95%. The Cat gets you 2um final filtration. So if you don't want to do both then I would do what you think is most important, f/w sep or 2um final filtration. Remember the upgrade filter I told you about for the f/w is 90% of both free and emulsified, and f/w seps are more efficient pre-pump.



Personally I like the idea of more than one f/w sep in the system, one of the reasons I have 2. . but then again I also have 2um final filtration... But honestly the AD final and the Baldwin PF7977 are both 5um absolute and score very well on their 2um filtration, the AD is 94% and the Baldwin is greater than 50%...



Hope that helps.