2 micron fuel filter mileage report...

[AH64ID]

Depends, you may be able to find one cheap that someone removed... But in general yes.

 

[steved]

Water is By far the biggest killer to CR injection systems.

Yep, fully agree with this statement. I had to have injectors replaced thanks to a load of water.



I have found that ULSD tends to be hygroscopic (I think that's the correct term, it absorbs water), and will accumulate water just sitting in a tank more so than LSD ever did.



I pre-filter almost every drop of fuel for that reason, fill through an auxiliary tank, that passes through a 10u water blocking filter, and then gravity feeds into the main tank... then it gets ran through an Airdog and its filters.



The fittings/openings at the top of the OE tank caused more harm from the water they introduced, than the dirt.

 

[Wingate]

Depends, you may be able to find one cheap that someone removed... But in general yes.

So, you are still running the 1R-0750???? I need to check the specs on the 299-8229 UHE Cat filter... see if it will work in place of the 1R-0750, or if I will need a different filter base... .

 

[BIGNASTY]

Yep, fully agree with this statement. I had to have injectors replaced thanks to a load of water.



I have found that ULSD tends to be hygroscopic (I think that's the correct term, it absorbs water), and will accumulate water just sitting in a tank more so than LSD ever did.



I pre-filter almost every drop of fuel for that reason, fill through an auxiliary tank, that passes through a 10u water blocking filter, and then gravity feeds into the main tank... then it gets ran through an Airdog and its filters.



The fittings/openings at the top of the OE tank caused more harm from the water they introduced, than the dirt.

Thats the setup I run only fill truck thru the Aux tank

 

[AH64ID]

So, you are still running the 1R-0750???? I need to check the specs on the 299-8229 UHE Cat filter... see if it will work in place of the 1R-0750, or if I will need a different filter base... .

I run the 1R-0750, and will go to the P551313 at my next change. There is zero documentation from Cat as to the ratings on the 299-8229 and no crosses to compare. It won't fit the same head as the 1R-0750.

 

[Wingate]

I haven't really went looking for the specs... guess I will work on that tomorrow... just to see if its better or the same as the 1R-0750. I know its the reccomended filter for the Cat 4. 4 and 6. 6 HPCR engines. They no longer reccomend the 1R replacement filter... and its designation went from HE to UHE. .

 

[AH64ID]

I agree it's supposed to be better, and don't doubt that it is better... But I know the specs on the P551313 far exceed Bosch recommendations and I get to keep the 1-14" filter head.

 

[Wingate]

I thought Bosch recommended a 2 micron single pass???

 

[AH64ID]

From the conversations I have had with Bosch 5um single pass is their min recommendation. Which based on what Cummins runs in their non-Dodge applications sounds correct.

There is also no "current" test method to test 2um single pass, there can be "better than 3um" but that's the best.

 

[Wingate]

Well, I have had some lengthy conversation about the Cat filters today... along with a couple of interesting e-mails... . end result... Cat will not give out the exact performance specs of any of their filters.

That being said, I DID get some info. on why, and what I came away with was that the testing procedures for giving filter ratings is all extremely subjective and about as useful as tits on a boar hog.

"Caterpillar has never published micron ratings because the numbers can be misleading or easily manipulated. Note that while many filter companies use absolute and nominal “micron ratings” in their sales literature, the term has no official standing within filter industry technical groups such as the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) or the National Fluid Power Association (NFPA). "

This almost reminds me of what I learned when I started researching new compound bows... . Everybody had the fastest bow in their advertisements... . but there is no set of industry wide standards that all manufacturers must test to... . !!!!!!

 

[TCDiesel]

Wingate... . Finally someone understand what I have been saying for Years. . cat makes good filters,But they Don't meet MY standards. . I know who makes them and the true ratings. I was employed under contact late 09 and early 10 with CAT here at BP.

 

[AH64ID]

That is similar to what I have been finding over the last few months, not bad filters and do what we need, but the specs are too fuzzy...

I get a kick out of them stating they don't publish micron ratings yet I can find them on multiple pieces of CAT literature.

If CAT made filters for other engines their specs would be easier to obtain.

 

[TCDiesel]

That is similar to what I have been finding over the last few months, not bad filters and do what we need, but the specs are too fuzzy...



I get a kick out of them stating they don't publish micron ratings yet I can find them on multiple pieces of CAT literature.



If CAT made filters for other engines their specs would be easier to obtain.

Exactly... ... ... .

 

[Wingate]

I trust their (Cat) filters... . I have seen what a crappy filter does to an engine. Whether its air/oil/ or fuel... . crappy filters will kill an engine every time... I've been sitting here trying to remember ANY situation where a Cat branded filter ever got blamed on a failure..... and I'm coming up blank... thats pretty good specs for me!

Sounds like I can basically throw all the advertised specs in the trash and just go with a filter manufacturer that I TRUST has invested the required research time and dollars to ensure that their product is built right the and has consistent quality!

Some interesting reading...

"For example, if 2,000 particles 5 microns or greater are counted upstream and 1,000 particles 5 microns or greater are counted downstream in the oil, the Beta Ratio equals 2. B5 = 2 means that a 5 micron filter can remove 50% of all particles that are 5 microns or larger.

Although the multipass test was originally intended as a research and development tool for filter development, most will-fit marketing groups commonly use Beta ratios of 2 and 75 as the definition of a filter's “nominal” and “absolute” rating. Thus, the filter illustrated is said to have a “nominal rating of 5 microns” and an “absolute rating of 15 microns. ”

Lab efficiency can be calculated from the Beta ratio in the following manner:

RatioBetaEfficiency11%−=

Beta Ratio

Efficiency(%)

2-------50%

75------98. 7%

200-----99. 5%

As can be seen, ratios above 75 do not represent a significant improvement. The added cost for a Beta=200 filter only improves lab test efficiency by 0. 8%. Variability in sampling and testing can often account for such minor differences. "