Here I am

Bypass filter - Oil Analysis Shootout

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Florida transmission shop

Toledo Ohio

Here's what you can expect to see using Frantz bypass oil filtration after 30k miles on the oil.

Would like to see how the other filters compare.

Am especially interested in how these results compare to using the FS-2500 since Filtration Solutions has a pretty impressive demo here: http://www.fs2500.com/fs2500_video.htm

Particle Count:

ISO Code (2) ------- 15/12
NAS 1638 Class ---- 1
ISO Code (3) ------- 16/15/12
>= 2 Micron --------- 808
>= 5 Micron --------- 299
>= 10 Micron -------- 82
>= 15 Micron -------- 32
>= 25 Micron -------- 7
>= 50 Micron -------- 0
>= 100 Micron ------- 0

Particle Count Explanation. .
http://blackstone-labs.com/all_about_particle_counts.html
 
Last edited:
I have about 1600 to go on my oil before I submit another oil sample. I have never asked for a particle count, but I think I will this time. I use Blackstone also so it will be interesting. I am using the SpinnerII to remove soot from the oil. :)
 
Fs-2500

I purchased one recently and will install shortly. I purchased this filter because of the soot control. We will just have to see how it works. Sam
 
How are you going to install your return line. I have the necessary fitting to make a custom 1 inch turbo return line for the back return port on the passengers side of the motor. Stainless of course using a Cummins OEM steel return for port insertion. Let me know PM if you want and I will send you some pics of what it is.



-Wally-
 
Does the TP ever fall apart? What keeps the TP from getting shredded? How does this thing work with the oil pressure that the Cummins produces? Sorry for so many questions but, I have been looking into getting a Frantz for a while now. I also want to control the soot and have been trying to decide between the Frantz or the Spinner.
 
I'd like to see your particle count, either here or in my earlier thread.



Sorta amazing that with all the interest in various oils and different brands/types of bypass oil filters, so few bother with particle counts to actually verify their effectiveness and make valid comparisons... ;) :confused:
 
As far as trying to decide which filter is better, I think that is the wrong approach. In reality it comes down to what you are comfortable with.



The Franz is a good unit with many miles of proven performance behind it. It does work and works very well. There is some maintenance involved with it in that you do need to change it out and you need to replenish for lost oil.



The Spinner II is also a good unit using the practice of centrifugal force to sperate and remove soot from the oil. It to must me serviced by taking it apart and cleaning it about once a year or how every many miles that it will go before reaching maximum dirt hold capacity. You do not have to replenish any oil with it though, although with that said, you would find yourself replenishing oil with your normal filter change.



I will get a particle count done when I do my next oil analysis in a few week. I have another 900 mile trip coming up.



As far as the term shootout goes, I am not in competition with anyone nor are we doing copy exactly. In reality we are comparing approach methods to the same problem, "Clean, Reliable, Extended, Lubrication Application Methods" or "CRELAM" if you will.



Each of us has a different driving style which contributes to what happens with our oil and it cleanliness. Not all truck are mod'ed the same nor do they all have the same mileage. These are points that are over looked and need to be put into the equation before one can claim that one method is better than another.



I am comfortable with my approach to the problem and trust it. Those who run the Franz are comfortable with their approach to the problem and trust it.



In reality, like mods it comes down to an individual preference. ;)



Just my humble opinion :D
 
Mundgyver said:
As far as trying to decide which filter is better, I think that is the wrong approach. In reality it comes down to what you are comfortable with.



The Franz is a good unit with many miles of proven performance behind it. It does work and works very well. There is some maintenance involved with it in that you do need to change it out and you need to replenish for lost oil.



The Spinner II is also a good unit using the practice of centrifugal force to sperate and remove soot from the oil. It to must me serviced by taking it apart and cleaning it about once a year or how every many miles that it will go before reaching maximum dirt hold capacity. You do not have to replenish any oil with it though, although with that said, you would find yourself replenishing oil with your normal filter change.



I will get a particle count done when I do my next oil analysis in a few week. I have another 900 mile trip coming up.



As far as the term shootout goes, I am not in competition with anyone nor are we doing copy exactly. In reality we are comparing approach methods to the same problem, "Clean, Reliable, Extended, Lubrication Application Methods" or "CRELAM" if you will.



Each of us has a different driving style which contributes to what happens with our oil and it cleanliness. Not all truck are mod'ed the same nor do they all have the same mileage. These are points that are over looked and need to be put into the equation before one can claim that one method is better than another.



I am comfortable with my approach to the problem and trust it. Those who run the Franz are comfortable with their approach to the problem and trust it.



In reality, like mods it comes down to an individual preference. ;)



Just my humble opinion :D



The above quote and philosophy is worth discussion.



It will always be true that "one size rarely fits all" - and trying to convince a Ford fan to buy a Dodge is nearly impossible - regardless of how many facts or statistics are provided to influence the final choice.



Bypass filters will undoubtedly follow the same pattern.



Still, in a product or device that has the clear and intended goal of cleaning our oil the absolutely best we can, that choice DOES seem a bit more clearly defined!



Sure, there are tradeoffs in price, ease of maintenance, and installation - but how MUCH will we allow or accept those tradeoffs to erode the basic goal of cleanest oil - and if we are willing to accept significantly reduced performance to "gain" some degree of convenience, maybe we'd be better off to simply avoid bypass filtering altogether?



Is it wiser to choose a spin-on type filter because it's easier to change, and lasts longer than another type - even if the spin-on can easily be shown to do a poorer job at what we bought it for - CLEANING the oil? ;)



After all, it has been seen MANY times that these engines WITHOUT anything other than routine maintenance are capable of lifespans FAR greater than most of us will ever keep them!



Personally, I chose to install bypass filtering on my truck because, at least during the time *I* own the truck, I want the cleanest oil possible circulating thru it. In earlier years, Frantz TP filters were about the ONLY product available for that purpose.



Now, we have a fairly broad selection - with new ones hitting the scene regularly - and some like Amsoil developing what they claim are the best filter media available.



So which one is REALLY the best? It's certainly true that test results will vary to a degree, depending upon individual mods and truck applications - but at the same time, oil filtration isn't rocket science, and the ability of one filter's performance vs another isn't really likely to be all that hard to determine.



We'll argue the quality and performance of one oil vs another REPEATEDLY in these forums - and usually without the faintest shred of supporting individual testing or analysis to support our personal decision - resorting instead, to "warm and fuzzy feelings", or some claims made by the folks SELLING the oil.



In the case of bypass filters, direct comparison isn't all that hard to obtain - it's as easy as taking a sample and having it analyzed. Then, when results are in, only the buyer/user can decide whether the ease of a throw-away spin-on outweighs the efficiency of a unit that requires the few added minutes to physically remove the old element and install a new one into it's housing . Or, perhaps only scrape out the crusted residue accumulated in a specific number of months or miles.



But unless the bottom line goal is cleanest oil possible, at a relatively comparable price and reasonable effort, why even bother? :confused: :confused:
 
Gary - K7GLD said:
The above quote and philosophy is worth discussion.



It will always be true that "one size rarely fits all" - and trying to convince a Ford fan to buy a Dodge is nearly impossible - regardless of how many facts or statistics are provided to influence the final choice.



Bypass filters will undoubtedly follow the same pattern.



Still, in a product or device that has the clear and intended goal of cleaning our oil the absolutely best we can, that choice DOES seem a bit more clearly defined!



Sure, there are tradeoffs in price, ease of maintenance, and installation - but how MUCH will we allow or accept those tradeoffs to erode the basic goal of cleanest oil - and if we are willing to accept significantly reduced performance to "gain" some degree of convenience, maybe we'd be better off to simply avoid bypass filtering altogether?



Is it wiser to choose a spin-on type filter because it's easier to change, and lasts longer than another type - even if the spin-on can easily be shown to do a poorer job at what we bought it for - CLEANING the oil? ;)



After all, it has been seen MANY times that these engines WITHOUT anything other than routine maintenance are capable of lifespans FAR greater than most of us will ever keep them!



Personally, I chose to install bypass filtering on my truck because, at least during the time *I* own the truck, I want the cleanest oil possible circulating thru it. In earlier years, Frantz TP filters were about the ONLY product available for that purpose.



Now, we have a fairly broad selection - with new ones hitting the scene regularly - and some like Amsoil developing what they claim are the best filter media available.



So which one is REALLY the best? It's certainly true that test results will vary to a degree, depending upon individual mods and truck applications - but at the same time, oil filtration isn't rocket science, and the ability of one filter's performance vs another isn't really likely to be all that hard to determine.



We'll argue the quality and performance of one oil vs another REPEATEDLY in these forums - and usually without the faintest shred of supporting individual testing or analysis to support our personal decision - resorting instead, to "warm and fuzzy feelings", or some claims made by the folks SELLING the oil.



In the case of bypass filters, direct comparison isn't all that hard to obtain - it's as easy as taking a sample and having it analyzed. Then, when results are in, only the buyer/user can decide whether the ease of a throw-away spin-on outweighs the efficiency of a unit that requires the few added minutes to physically remove the old element and install a new one into it's housing . Or, perhaps only scrape out the crusted residue accumulated in a specific number of months or miles.



But unless the bottom line goal is cleanest oil possible, at a relatively comparable price and reasonable effort, why even bother? :confused: :confused:

Not wanting to take away ANYTHING that you beleive regarding oil analysis Gary, but as I've said before, every Oil analysis class that I have taken (3 classes) they always say "You can not compare oil analysis results do to the facts ALL engines are not created equel, and ALL engine are operated differently". The only way to compare oil analysis is by trending.



As to the above analysis shown with 30,000 on the oil Gary, there was 5 QUARTS of makeup oil added in that 30,000 miles! That's 1/2 of the current Dodge/Cummins capacity, and roughly 1 quart every 6 thousand miles!



This by itself is going to effect ALL the readings due to the added *NEW* oil.



Wayne
 
The only way to compare oil analysis is by trending.



And the only way on this subject and thread to GET any "trending", is to get enough individual reports to establish at least in general what different bypass filters are actually doing. IF we could obtain enough analysis data from members here - such as a half dozen Frantz users, a half dozen Ansoil, and so on, we should be able to arrive at a REASONABLY decent trend conclusion - and why would anyone discourage such a gathering of analysis data?



Do any here REALLY suggest that ANY comparisons of different bypass filters by way of analysis and particle counts is totally worthless? If so, step up and make your case!



BUT, my specific debate issue posted up further above related to the suggestion that:



In reality it comes down to what you are comfortable with.



THAT comment and philosophy I personally and respectfully disagree with. It's easy enough - and plain old common sense, to use whatever test methods are available to clearly establish what actually WORKS, and not simply settle for what we might convince ourselves to be "comfortable with"!



I have confidence in the stuff I finally select for use on my truck - and usually make my decisions on what I feel are sound principles and results of real world testing - not advertising hype or well intended but questionable opinions, often by guys with even less expertise than I have!



I have also found that often those who reject comparison testing of what they have used or are selling, do so from a lack of supporting date, and/or confidence and faith in their choice.



By NO MEANS directed at you Wayne, but at the underlying premise detected here that actual testing of products - bypass filters in this case - are futile, and not to be relied upon as proof of quality or efficiency.
 
Last edited:
Gary - K7GLD said:
And the only way on this subject and thread to GET any "trending", is to get enough individual reports to establish at least in general what different bypass filters are actually doing. IF we could obtain enough analysis data from members here - such as a half dozen Frantz users, a half dozen Ansoil, and so on, we should be able to arrive at a REASONABLY decent trend conclusion - and why would anyone discourage such a gathering of analysis data?



Do any here REALLY suggest that ANY comparisons of different bypass filters by way of analysis and particle counts is totally worthless? If so, step up and make your case!



BUT, my specific debate issue posted up further above related to the suggestion that:







THAT comment and philosophy I personally and respectfully disagree with. It's easy enough - and plain old common sense, to use whatever test methods are available to clearly establish what actually WORKS, and not simply settle for what we might convince ourselves to be "comfortable with"!



I have confidence in the stuff I finally select for use on my truck - and usually make my decisions on what I feel are sound principles and results of real world testing - not advertising hype or well intended but questionable opinions, often by guys with even less expertise than I have!



I have also found that often those who reject comparison testing of what they have used or are selling, do so from a lack of supporting date, and/or confidence and faith in their choice.



By NO MEANS directed at you Wayne, but at the underlying premise detected here that actual testing of products - bypass filters in this case - are futile, and not to be relied upon as proof of quality or efficiency.



I do agree with you Gary, on what we become comfortable with. Some people are just sa comfortable changing Engine oil at 3,000/3 Months, just "because" their influenced by "advertising hype" from the oil change industry. Me, I'm not interested in that, simply because I've seen Facts that support otherwise. They (the oil Companies) want your money!



On the oil analysis subject, I am currently doing oil analysis on several fleets with up to 11 vehicles. On the one account there are 6 trucks, that are the same brand, size, year and engines are the same displacement. The only differences are the drivers, and how they are driven. Of these 6 trucks, NONE of them have the same results, using the same oil, Oil filters, and using the same oil analysis lab. All of these trucks have an oil analysis done on a yearly basis.





Wayne
 
On the oil analysis subject, I am currently doing oil analysis on several fleets with up to 11 vehicles. On the one account there are 6 trucks, that are the same brand, size, year and engines are the same displacement. The only differences are the drivers, and how they are driven. Of these 6 trucks, NONE of them have the same results, using the same oil, Oil filters, and using the same oil analysis lab. All of these trucks have an oil analysis done on a yearly basis.



I agree it would be foolish to expect EACH of the trucks you indicate above to register the exact same results - but on the other hand, I *would* expect to see the results to be pretty similar. You seem to indicate wide variations in analysis results - would you care to elaborate as to how wide they are varying in analysis? Perhaps at least in wear numbers, such as Iron, Aluminum and Lead?
 
amsoilman said:
I am currently doing oil analysis on several fleets with up to 11 vehicles.

Any way we can see some numbers?? Preferrably from a comparable motor with Amsoil bypass filtering. .

Re: 5 quarts of make-up oil. . True. But at this rate, It may be a long time before I have to pull the drain plug. I dont have a problem with changing oil one quart at a time over serveral years.
 
Shortshift said:
Re: 5 quarts of make-up oil. . True. But at this rate, It may be a long time before I have to pull the drain plug. I dont have a problem with changing oil one quart at a time over serveral years.



Not to be a smart@#$ - but the Amsoil users don't have any qualms about it either - they fairly commonly post analysis #'s as used in extended oil changes with the Amsoil bypass filters installed, and routinely also add makeup oil as part of that setup... ;) :D
 
Gary - K7GLD said:
I agree it would be foolish to expect EACH of the trucks you indicate above to register the exact same results - but on the other hand, I *would* expect to see the results to be pretty similar. You seem to indicate wide variations in analysis results - would you care to elaborate as to how wide they are varying in analysis? Perhaps at least in wear numbers, such as Iron, Aluminum and Lead?



Here are a couple I can show you Gary.



Same Brand Engines, same size trucks, same year trucks.



Oil was the same brand (Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel & MArine 15W-40)



Mileage on truck # 6



Total Miles= 54,000



Mileage on Oil Sample=45,000



Iron 68 ppm



Chromium 3 ppm



Lead 6 ppm



Mileage on truck #2



Total Miles=53,258



Mileage on Oil sample=43,300



Iron 87 ppm



Chromium 8 ppm



Lead 11 ppm



Both trucks showed the Oil was still suitable for continued use.





Wayne
 
amsoilman said:
Here are a couple I can show you Gary.



Same Brand Engines, same size trucks, same year trucks.



Oil was the same brand (Amsoil Heavy Duty Diesel & MArine 15W-40)



Mileage on truck # 6



Total Miles= 54,000



Mileage on Oil Sample=45,000



Iron 68 ppm



Chromium 3 ppm



Lead 6 ppm



Mileage on truck #2



Total Miles=53,258



Mileage on Oil sample=43,300



Iron 87 ppm



Chromium 8 ppm



Lead 11 ppm



Both trucks showed the Oil was still suitable for continued use.





Wayne



OK Wayne thanks - now, the BIG question:



Do YOU consider the above differences in analysis #'s radical or extreme?



Think long on your reply... ;) :D







































Personally, I consider that for different engines in different trucks, different drivers plus other normal variations - those numbers are ENTIRELY acceptable and within reason for ballpark comparisons.



NOW, if Iron in one of those was up well above 100 - or any of the others a significant multiple of the other, THEN we can start considering the differences extreme - and perhaps start looking for the basic reason for the difference.



Again, I wouldn't expect the 2 trucks (or any OTHER 2 trucks!) to display nearly identical #'s, hell, even the identically SAME samples to the same analyzer commonly comes back with slightly different #'s - and I think what you have provided certainly falls into the acceptable level for averaging purposes... If anything, I'm surprised they are as close as they are!



Look at it another way - the way many extended drain guys do when figuring average wear numbers. If you take the Iron wear numbers above, and calculated the AVERAGE 5000 mile mileage change interval against the cumulative Iron listed above, 9 oil changes divided into those numbers gives you about 7. 5 for one truck, and 9. 5 for the other!



Not so alarming a difference in that light eh? ;) :D



SO, in the case of particle counts, as this thread is all about, what sort of differences ARE "significant"?



HMMMmmmmm...



Well, if bypass filter "A" gave a average result of 200 particles in the >2 Micron range among 6 trucks tested over a 5000 mile average interval, and bypass filter "B" gave a reading of over 500 particles under the same conditions, THAT would seem pretty significant.



THEN, comes the big question - if MY truck can be expected to deliver 500,000 miles without overhaul with a consistent Iron reading of 10 PPM and a particle count of 200 in the > 2 micron range, does that mean YOUR truck showing Iron #'s of 20 PPM and Particle count of 400 in the > 2 Micron range mean your truck will wear out twice as fast as mine, and only make 250,000 miles to overhaul?



Yeah, we both know the answer to that one - absolutely NOT! ;) :D
 
Last edited:
Mundgyver said:
As far as trying to decide which filter is better, I think that is the wrong approach. In reality it comes down to what you are comfortable with.





I agree with this statement and will only add that each person needs to decide how they are using the bypass filter... not only are the filters different, how people drive different, but how people use the filter is also different.



I am running an amsoil filter. Simply because it screws on and is good down to 2 micron. I also only intend to run the oil (Rotella) 7. 5k and the bypass filter 15k... without oil analysis. I am only using the filter to "polish" the oil between "normal" oil change intervals... I am not relying on it to function so I can get 488,431. 34531 miles on a single oil change. :)



steved
 
Gary,

Sorry for the delay in answering, but I went out of town to enjoy my 71st Birthday!



To answer your question as to the differences between the two trucks being "radical or Extreme", I would NOT consider them to be much different at all! However, some people on this board may think differently. They may look at the numbers between their own truck and another, and look at them as "whole" numbers, you know, a number 10 is much larger than a number 1 figure.



Wayne

amsoilman
 
Back
Top