Brian - it's been years since I bought my last Frantz filter - they used to especially recommend Charmin as I recall, but products change over the years. *I* buy service type rolls as used in restaurants and such because they tend to be more tightly wound and less apt to "channel" in use.
BUT, I'll make you a public challenge, since you describe yourself as a "doubter":
You and I will both change our oil immediately, saving the receipts for materials used - you stick with whatever brand oil you choose, and whichever off the shelf full-flow filter you want - *I* will do the same, except that I will also be using the Frantz filter. At 5000 miles, we will both drain the oil and send samples to whatever analysis outfit you care to select. The one of us showing HIGHER wear particles and contaminents will PAY for BOTH analysis costs and oil/filters used in BOTH engines - and THEN will make a public post to this group about the results.
The results will be based on:
Iron particles
aluminum particles
silicon (dirt) particles
chrome particles
copper particles
insolubles
the above are most directly related to actual wear and contaminents generated in our engines. For the record, MY last test while using the Frantz TP filter showed the following results in parts-per-million:
aluminum - 2 "normal" - 4
chrome - 1 "normal" - 2
iron - 8 "normal" - 25
copper - 2 "normal" 7
silicon - 3 "normal" - 9
insolubles - . 4 "normal" . 7 or less
I'll make that SAME offer to ANY other doubting member in this thread/group currently using ONLY the standard full flow filter on their trucks - so how about it - talks cheap (AND worthless!) - anyone want to put their money where their mouth is, and put their doubts and predjudices to the test out in public, for ALL to see?
