Disappointed in the TDR 71 Oil Filter review

[AH64ID]

I have looked at them a little, but I am not sure yet. I doub't they have any flow issues, and should do better than a normal full flow, but no subsitite for a true bypass.

 

[04blackcherry]

I just found a Hastings LF608 for our application. I'm in the process of getting some numbers from them on filtration and media. AH64ID, does this one come up on your radar screen? I have to assume that you have talked to a lot of filter manufactures about filters. Most of the numbers you're giving us you can't readily find on their web sites. Hastings has a tech line and do invite inquiries.

 

[AH64ID]

I haven't looked it up, but hastings is baldwin... So it should be the same filter as the BT7349.

 

[04blackcherry]

The Hastings sounds like the same filter as the Baldwin. 12 nominal and 30 absolute with glass blend media. The tech department was @baldwinfilter.com .

 

[AH64ID]

That's how their fuel filters are, same filter different part number.

 

[04blackcherry]

It's confirmed; the Hastings LF608 is made by Baldwin and is the same as the BT7349.

 

[Bob V]

Beta is the ONLY numbers that really mean anything. "Nominal" and "absolute" numbers are different between manufacturers and don't mean the same thing.

 

[morbius]

A little note about Amsoil EaBP-110 2um bypass ... . In an independent test lab, the EaBP-110 filter was only effective for less than 20 minute runtime. After 20 minutes of continuous use in a modified ISO 16889 (1999) fractional efficiency multipass test, the filter efficiency dropped to 64. 9 at 3 microns. Also after 20 minutes, the filter efficiency for anything greater than 30-40 microns was too low to measure ... .



The information on filters from AH64ID has always been top notch ! Very good work !

 

[brods]

Thanks guys!



I made a few phone calls this morning to reverify the info I have in my notes. Fleetguard gave me a different set of numbers on the LF3972 and LF16035 than I had previously received. The numbers coorelate, so it could just be different systems? Here is what I have for popular filters, from worst to best.



Donaldson P558615 40 @ 98. 7%, 20 @ 50% Cellulose

Fleetguard LF3972 30 @ 95% (35 @ 98. 7% last info) Cellulose

Wix 57620 30 @ 95%, 20 @ 50% Cellulose

Wix 57620XE 25 @ 95%, 14 @ 50% Glass Enhanced Cellulose

Baldwin BT7349 30 @ 98. 7%, 12 @ 50% Synthetic blend

Fleetguard LF16035 30 @ 100% (25 @ 98. 7% last info) Stratapore Synthetic

Purolator L45335 20 @ 97. 5% Cellulose

Purolator PL45335 20 @ 99. 9% Synthetic

Amsoil EaO80 20 @ 100%, 15@ 98. 7%, 7 @ 59. 97% Nanofiber Synthetic

Donaldson Elf7349 20 @ 100%, 15@ 98. 7%, 7 @ 59. 97% Nanofiber Synthetic



.....

It is kind of surprising that the Purolator cellulose blows away every other cellulose filter and is even better than the Stratapore?? Misprint maybe? Not the same testing method?



I always look forward to John Martin’s articles and this one was interesting as always. It did seem to raise more questions than it answered though. The comment stating there were at least ten tests used to validate filters without elaborating was a bit of a tease and left the reader wondering what those tests were.



Another question that came to mind is how much does the spring in the filter really matter? It appears the spring is there simply to hold the element against the base plate to allow for loose manufacturing tolerances. Once the oil is flowing the differential pressure will force the element more tightly against the base plate. Since the forces from the flowing oil would be acting in the same direction as the spring pressure, how then would pulsations expose the spring to forces that would cause it to fatigue?



When talking about synthetic elements the Fleetguard engineer’s analogy between a random grid and a uniform grid is somewhat confusing, especially when looking at the pictures of the media. As stated elsewhere in the article the main advantage of synthetic media is the synthetic fibers themselves are smaller in diameter which allows for more pores per square inch than regular cellulose.



Imho one should really read the next two articles, “What is a Micron” by John Martin and “Fleetguard’s Venturi Oil Filter” by Robert Patton. As a group the three articles give the reader the knowledge and perspective to make a more informed choice when deciding which oil filter to run. The referenced article in issue 32 would probably add even more useful information, unfortunately that issue is not available online yet.



We all want things kept as simple as possible, so it is understandable why we tend to get hung up on efficiency numbers as the end all for selecting a filter. It is simple to compare a bunch of numbers and pick the “best” one, but…. .

Micron rating is a rating given to a filter characterizing efficiency of particle removal at a given size and test method (i. e. 10 _m at 95. 0% efficiency per ISO 4548-12). Without all three

components a micron rating cannot be directly compared to another rating.

When looking at numbers it is imperative that one compares apples to apples. For an example using fuel filters for our trucks, iirc Baldwin appears to have a much higher dirt holding capacity than most others. When looking into the details it turns out that Baldwin uses a much higher pressure drop to determine when their filter is “full”. That gives the Baldwin filter an inflated number compared to the other filters which use a lower pressure drop as the “full” point. In this case using the published numbers is not an apples to apples comparison.



Even when comparing efficiency numbers apples to apples there is more to it:

Efficiency, capacity and cold flow ability requirements are critical, and necessary to ensure optimum engine life and performance. The optimal balance of these three requirements can only be accurately determined through real world testing that imitates the conditions found in a real world operating environment.

YMMV

 

[AH64ID]

It is kind of surprising that the Purolator cellulose blows away every other cellulose filter and is even better than the Stratapore?? Misprint maybe? Not the same testing method?

I was quite shocked when I saw that info as well! Same ISO standard as the other filters. . Just appears to be a good cellulose filter, probably has a short life, not sure I would run it 7500 miles. . more like 3K. But that's just my thoughts.

Imho one should really read the next two articles, “What is a Micron” by John Martin and “Fleetguard’s Venturi Oil Filter” by Robert Patton. As a group the three articles give the reader the knowledge and perspective to make a more informed choice when deciding which oil filter to run. The referenced article in issue 32 would probably add even more useful information, unfortunately that issue is not available online yet.

I agree, but the misinformation in the "What is a Micron" article is why I decided to post this up. As you can plainly see the Fleetguard Stratapore isn't the most efficient filter in the industry.

 

[p-Bar]

AH64ID always a pleasure to read your post.

 

[R C Cola]

Education Abounds

This is an example of the type of information that caused me to join this forum in the first place. Thanks guys! Has anyone that we know of ever done serious testing on the Frantz filter with specific results ? R C

 

[amsoilman]

This is an example of the type of information that caused me to join this forum in the first place. Thanks guys! Has anyone that we know of ever done serious testing on the Frantz filter with specific results ? R C

I have not done "Specific" tests of the Frantz filter, but have done with another brand, that uses a different filter element, specificly a "Spin-on" element.



The Frantz filter element is a roll of toilet paper, so it will never have the same results twice, due to differing paper rolls, as well as how "tight" the roll is after installing in the filter housing. I have used this Frantz filter before, and in many cases the toilet paper element, had to have some of the paper removed, inorder to get the thing in the housing. They do however do a fair job of filtering oil, but they recommend changing the element aroud 2-3 thousand mile intervals. "Spin-on" bypass elements are more specific in filter testing as they are manufatured to a specific standard. ie. Micron/Beta ratings.



Gary Davidson, has done some extensive use on his truck, testing the Frantz filter setup, and he likes it very well. If you do a search on the TDR, for "Anotomy of a toilet paper filter", (I think that is the heading) you can read about that there.

 

[DACoffman]

Does anyone know how the K&N oil filter measures up. Autozone carries the oil I use vavoline 15w40 but didnt want to go to 2 places to get everything.

 

[Jim W]

I have stayed out of this debate but have read it extensively. My only comment to you, is I would not put any K & N filters oil/air and if they make a fuel filter on my truck. K & N spends more money in marketing then they do in making and test filters. At one time I believe there were warranty issue with K & N oil filters on Cummins engines.

I purchase my oil and fuel filters from Geno's garage and I order 6 oil filters with three fuel filters at a time. This way I can spread the shipping cost over all of the filters. I also have them on hand when I need them.

I order Fleetguard Stratapore oil filter part number LF16035 $12. 95 and the Fleetguard fuel filter. There are several different part numbers depending on the year of your truck. that you will need to order the correct one for your year of truck.

Jim W.

 

[AH64ID]

I have stayed out of this debate but have read it extensively. My only comment to you, is I would not put any K & N filters oil/air and if they make a fuel filter on my truck. K & N spends more money in marketing then they do in making and test filters. At one time I believe there were warranty issue with K & N oil filters on Cummins engines.

I purchase my oil and fuel filters from Geno's garage and I order 6 oil filters with three fuel filters at a time. This way I can spread the shipping cost over all of the filters. I also have them on hand when I need them.

I order Fleetguard Stratapore oil filter part number LF16035 $12. 95 and the Fleetguard fuel filter. There are several different part numbers depending on the year of your truck. that you will need to order the correct one for your year of truck.

Jim W.

I agree. I know nothing of their oil filters, but won't run them based on the quailty of their air filters. Same for Wix I won't run their filters based on their fuel filters.

 

[kscheffler]

THis is great info. Since most of us CTD owners also have automobiles I would like to see a similiar article for gas engines. I would quess that the filter options for gas engines is huge and equally confusing.

 

[MSicotte]

On my Napa Prolink it says the ELF7349 interchanges to the Napa NGF 7620XE, (which is what I use) Are they actually the same? I'm always curious when they say one parts is the same as the other with just a different number..... does one company make the filter for many and then it just gets badged accordingly?

 

[AH64ID]

Based on the published specs they are not the same filter.

 

[MSicotte]

Thats just fantastic... ... ..... guess the fuel filters that interchange that I just installed aren't the same as what they are supposed to be either. Insert expletive here... ..... #@$%!