Franz oil filters?

[Jim Ross]

Has anyone tried the Franz oil filters? I had one on a '60 Jeep and it worked very well, but I've not heard of anyone using one on our Cummins.

I had an extended conversation with a guy who pulls/delivers RVs and he has 2 of them on his 7. 3 power stroke along with 2 other bypass filters plus a stock spin-on filter. He says he can go 70K or more and still has clean oil..... pretty amazing claim, so I am curious.

 

[steved]

Search, there's extensive threads on the Frantz on these forums.

 

[CKelley1]

the problem with the frantz on a 04. 5 up the in-cylinder egr produces so much carbon it clogs the filter so fast that you will have to change every 500 miles and with the new cj4 oil you can not go past 20,000 miles because of additive depletion, you can do like your buddy did by paralleling two frantz and serising them after a amzoil or luberfiner bypass filter. with the luberfiner 9750 filter on a lmb451 base, paralleled frantz and a lf16035 main filter you can go 40,000 miles between oil and filter change. read the following paste . the 9750 holds three quarts. at oil drain interval i do not like leaving 2 to 3 quarts of dirty oil in. we unscrew the filter and let it drain while we change oil. then screw it back on. do not change the filter until it no longer flows oil. remember what i said about filters. the bypass filter does not have a bypass built into the filter like a main lube has to have for safety. when the filter is full the filter simply quits flowing oil. the lfp9750 can be mounted sideways the lf777 is not recommended. to make the orifice solder a piece of shim stock into the 1/8" fitting that you use in the stock filter base and drill a 0. 032" hole in it. the hydraulic hose get made up at napa, cq or or hydraulic shop the 1/4" is usually more readily available and cheaper than the 3/16 but check first. if you use the lf777 the best place to mount is on a bed brace near the passenger side near the cab. the lfp9750 on the frame. the return to the filler cap. most of ours we drill a hole through the middle of the cap and use a swivel hydraulic fitting i have cut some out of aluminum and bought some amsoil ones. to check to see if the filter needs changing just feel the filter after a run. if it is hot it is ok. you can also unscrew the filler cap and observe flow. as the larger holes fill up in the filter it starts filtering down to smaller particles. that is why you do not want to change it until it no longer flows. just drain it at oil change time. the 9750 has a zink replenishment set up inside it. the filter cost is high but you can get 250,000 miles out of it. if you figure the cost per mile it comes out the cheapest and the zink is a big +.

 

[Jim Ross]

CKelly1,
Thanks for the info!
I know about not replacing the bypass filters as long as they get hot... cold means they are no longer flowing.
I have 2 AmsOil bypass filters on an AmsOil BMK-22 filter mount attached to the frame under the passenger side door. I was thinking perhaps it might be good to try mounting a Frantz in place of the downstream (2nd) AmsOil bypass filter,... if i can figure out a way to cleanly attach it to the AmsOil BMK-22 filter mount. Ideally, I would like to be able to just spin it onto the BMK unit just like I do with the AmsOil filters.
As you say, I might end up having to change the Frantz element pretty frequently, but I have the time and I only drive this truck about 5,000 miles per year.

 

[steved]

I disagree with both the "carbon" and additive claim. Lots of guys run Frantz filters on 3rd gens at a 2500 to 3000 mile interval without them plugging in "500 miles". I ran my GCF to 20k and it wasn't plugged... and that's not much bigger than two stacked rolls of TP. And further, I have ran CJ4 oils well PAST 20k (without makeup oil) and they still have loads of additives left... and that's based on UOA, not hearsay.



Run the Frantz, alone, without worry...

 

[CKelley1]

steved i have never ran a frantz on a 04. 5 up but on a 03 the frantz would barely make 3,000 miles and i know the 04. 5 makes 10 x the carbon. we tow very heavy with our trucks and use analysis to determine oil change intervals, and the additive was low on trucks with no bypass filters and the carbon was at the saturation point at 20,000 miles. jim i had a bmk-22 i picked up at a garage sale i took it apart and made a series fuel filter mount out of it. i have a good shop with lathes and a mill i had to block some passages and drill some new ones. i got to see exactly how the bmk22 works and where the passages are there is no way to hook the frantz up to the bmk 22 i am not fond of the bmk22 and think you should do away with it and go back to the lf16035 and a bmk12 in series with the frantz

#ad

 

[steved]

I would suspect you are far from the average user, and your experience do not apply to many here. As I stated, MANY 3rd gen (including the 04m5+ trucks) have used the Frantz without any problem.



I also have UOAs on CJ4 to 20k on both Rotella 15n40 and Schaeffer 5t40 that are completely fine and not much different from their virgin sample. I have been running CJ4 since it was introduced, and have not seen a bad sample yet, or heard of a bizillion blown engines from its use.

 

[Jim Ross]

Are there any proven numbers on the Frantz? Such as Absolute Efficiency?

 

[Jim Ross]

what is the lf16035? Is that a filter number?

 

[Jim Ross]

Did you mean to say bmk-21 instead of bmk-12?
Instead of doing away with the bmk-22, I think I could plumb into the downstream return line and then run that oil thru a Frantz and then back into the valve cover via my exisiting oil return line and AmsOil billet valve cover cap.
I think I have the room along the frame on the downstream side of the bmk-22 to mount a Frantz housing.

 

[rbattelle]

Here's the definitive thread on the Frantz, in case it helps.



-Ryan

 

[CKelley1]

i did mean 21, the 22 is worthless to use in front of the frantz the lf16035 is a cummins fleetguard primary synthetic filter, it holds more and filters better than any other filter and has the base a filter wrench fit's the only thing the 22 is good for is a paper weight or to convert to a fuel filter like i did.

 

[amsoilman]

Are there any proven numbers on the Frantz? Such as Absolute Efficiency?

There is no way to get consistent numbers with a Frantz by-pass system, as each and every roll of toilet paper you install in it is going to have varying tightness of the paper on the roll, so no consistency is going to be seen.



You have the best of the best in the Amsoil by-pass filter elements for consistency as well as filtering abilities.

 

[Jim Ross]

Hi Wayne,
I'm a Lifetime Dealer, since about 1980, and have used AmsOil by-pass systems on several vehicles over the years and have been very impressed with my results.
The only thin different with this '07 Cummins is the EGR system and how much soot it puts in the oil. I just keep thinking that there has to be some way that I can capture it.
I ran an AmsOil bypass system on my '01 Cummins (it did not have an EGR system) and the by-pass filter kept my oil so clean that I could read the dipstick markings through the oil for 11-12,000 miles. However, this '07 is a different story.
I like the BMK-22 set up (& a pair of 90's on it) with my own custom frame mount and I am not going to get rid of it, but I still may add something like the Frantz on the downstream side.
Cheers,
Jim

 

[amsoilman]

Jim,
According to ISO 23556 testing, the Amsoil by-pass filter lements remove 39 percent of soot contaminants less than one micron. Soot removal efficiency increases approximately 10 to 14 percent when the EaBP Filter is used in conjunction with a standard full-flow filter.

Accordingly, soot particles are less than 1 micron in size, and will "agglomerate", (which is a BIG word for attaching themselves) and will then become larger particles. There are oil additives(disspersants) in Diesel oils that will help in keeping these particles from agglomerating. The bottom line, is when an oil analysis lab tests oils, the equipment used can only measure particles that are larger than 5 MICRON. MOst labs that I know of don't worry about soot, untill the report shows above 3-4 percent by volume.

Wayne

 

[Jim Ross]

Wayne,
Thanks, again. Good info. I spoke to the AmsOil tech center a while back and they told me the Absolute Efficiency of their by-pass filters is either 2 or 3 microns (I can't remember which).
I'm running an AmsOil full flow filter plus the two EaBP-90's.
But, I'm always thinking and playing around with mechanical stuff, so I'll keep thinking about how to get my oil even cleaner. When I get more miles on my current oil, I will send it in and get it analyzed.
When I'm told that I can't do something, it becomes a challenge to prove that I can! I already have a couple of ideas on this oil cleaning business that I am running around in my head.
Cheers,
Jim

 

[amsoilman]

Wayne,

Thanks, again. Good info. I spoke to the AmsOil tech center a while back and they told me the Absolute Efficiency of their by-pass filters is either 2 or 3 microns (I can't remember which).

I'm running an AmsOil full flow filter plus the two EaBP-90's.

But, I'm always thinking and playing around with mechanical stuff, so I'll keep thinking about how to get my oil even cleaner. When I get more miles on my current oil, I will send it in and get it analyzed.

When I'm told that I can't do something, it becomes a challenge to prove that I can! I already have a couple of ideas on this oil cleaning business that I am running around in my head.

Cheers,

Jim

Jim,If you want to see how well the amsoil by-pass is doing for soot, do this little experiment; Pull the dipstick on your truck and wipe a small amount of oil onto your hands, then rub your hands together, and see how much "black" is still on your hands. The black left on your hands is soot.

 

[Jim Ross]

Several years ago, ARCO marketed a Graphite Oil that was absolutely black as it came out of the can (remember oil cans?).
I saw that oil put through an AmsOil by-pass filter and after going through the by-pass filter, the oil came out clear. The by-pass filter removed the graphite from ARCO's oil. So, the by-pass took out the graphite, which means the graphite particles must have been 5 microns and larger?... and it means our soot is comprised of particles smaller than what ARCO was selling as a lubricant in their oil? Interesting concept.