Mobil 1 vs. OEM filters
01-18-2009, 09:37 PM
#71
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpitfireS' date='Jan 17 2009, 03:43 PM
There is no nice way of saying this: what have you - 2007 Zx-10 - brought into this discussion to back up your claims?
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbth...1189112&fpart=3
01-18-2009, 09:39 PM
#72
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by my_slow_civic' date='Jan 18 2009, 08:28 PM
Still in break in mode, after 8k miles? Yet it still runs like a raped ape? Kind of contradicts what you are saying.
01-19-2009, 04:51 AM
#73
Registered User
Originally Posted by 2007 Zx-10' date='Jan 18 2009, 09:50 PM
As far as the high pressure (125 psi), I don't think it's a significant issue for any quality filter.
01-19-2009, 09:14 AM
#74
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what evidence do you have for this claim? and how do you know for a fact the Filtech is any better?
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbth...=310541&fpart=1
older link, but interesting...I remain confident the "synthetic blend" media in the M1 filter is superior, but the bypass valve pressure may be an issue of concern, the question is, how does peak oil pressure vary inside the engine, and within the filter housing?
p.1
p. 3
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbth...=310541&fpart=1
older link, but interesting...I remain confident the "synthetic blend" media in the M1 filter is superior, but the bypass valve pressure may be an issue of concern, the question is, how does peak oil pressure vary inside the engine, and within the filter housing?
p.1
Patman & BrewCityR, My e-mail question to K&N:
"Can you give me any info about your HP-1004 and HP-1005 oil filters bypass valve design and psi settings, as well as flow rate of each filter?"
And the response:
HP-1004:
M20 x 1.5-6H thread
3.12" OD
3.48" length
11-14 PSI
Has an anti-drain back valve
HP-1005
M20 x 1.5 thread
3.81" OD
3.49" length
11-17 PSI
Has an anti-drain back valve
So... Nothing on flow rate, which suprised me since their claim to fame is that they are higher flow filters than the rest of the world. The slight difference in bypass setting I don't think makes a difference though. Took about a week to get a reply. Anybody know what the "6H" means with regard to the thread? I think the bypass valve design is the same as the Mobil 1 M1-104 compared to the M1-105 in that the the M1-104/HP-1004 has the bypass in the can or top end, the M1-105/HP-1005 has it in the threaded base plate end. My understanding is that the latter may be a more desirable design since when in bypass, the oil makes a shorter loop and the unfiltered oil doesn't flush across the media on it's way to the bypass valve, possibly dragging some caputured junk with it in the process.
"Can you give me any info about your HP-1004 and HP-1005 oil filters bypass valve design and psi settings, as well as flow rate of each filter?"
And the response:
HP-1004:
M20 x 1.5-6H thread
3.12" OD
3.48" length
11-14 PSI
Has an anti-drain back valve
HP-1005
M20 x 1.5 thread
3.81" OD
3.49" length
11-17 PSI
Has an anti-drain back valve
So... Nothing on flow rate, which suprised me since their claim to fame is that they are higher flow filters than the rest of the world. The slight difference in bypass setting I don't think makes a difference though. Took about a week to get a reply. Anybody know what the "6H" means with regard to the thread? I think the bypass valve design is the same as the Mobil 1 M1-104 compared to the M1-105 in that the the M1-104/HP-1004 has the bypass in the can or top end, the M1-105/HP-1005 has it in the threaded base plate end. My understanding is that the latter may be a more desirable design since when in bypass, the oil makes a shorter loop and the unfiltered oil doesn't flush across the media on it's way to the bypass valve, possibly dragging some caputured junk with it in the process.
In most cases the synthetic media/microglass type oil filters are a total win/win in that they not only are capable of much finer, efficient filtration (10 microns) but also have a lower Delta P (flow easier) and have a much greater dirt/contaminant capacity than a cellulose (normal paper) filter.
I have replaced 3 micron beta 200 micro glass filters where a 30 micron beta 75 cellulose filter was and the 3 micron lasted twice as long before it had to be changed and exhibited the same pressure drop as the 30 micron.
That said, the Mobil 1/AC Gold are micro-glass/synthetic medium filters and should present no flow problems when compared with the K&N, etc. filters AND will do a much better job of filtration at the same time.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
I have replaced 3 micron beta 200 micro glass filters where a 30 micron beta 75 cellulose filter was and the 3 micron lasted twice as long before it had to be changed and exhibited the same pressure drop as the 30 micron.
That said, the Mobil 1/AC Gold are micro-glass/synthetic medium filters and should present no flow problems when compared with the K&N, etc. filters AND will do a much better job of filtration at the same time.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
01-19-2009, 10:26 AM
#75
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bypass pressures for most conventional oil filters seem to be less than 20 psi
http://www.zr1specialist.com/HAT%20Web/art..._comparison.htm
http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/oilfilter2.htm
I sent an email to Champion Labs tech support on this issue
http://www.zr1specialist.com/HAT%20Web/art..._comparison.htm
http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/oilfilter2.htm
I sent an email to Champion Labs tech support on this issue
01-19-2009, 11:01 AM
#76
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
important note about the bypass valves, and how they function
http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/oilfiltertest.htm
[QUOTE][SIZE=4]Why do we want the least restrictive oil filter? Simple, a greater quantity of oil supplied to the engine at higher pressures ensure that the engine will be protected as well as it can from the great loads and heat running through it.
Let
http://www.peterverdonedesigns.com/oilfiltertest.htm
[QUOTE][SIZE=4]Why do we want the least restrictive oil filter? Simple, a greater quantity of oil supplied to the engine at higher pressures ensure that the engine will be protected as well as it can from the great loads and heat running through it.
Let
01-19-2009, 11:08 AM
#77
Oil pressure doesn't lubricate and cool an engine. Flow does. The oil pressure (as measured post-filter at the pressure switch for those that have an aftermarket pressure gauge) actually decreases during VTEC. That's because the VTEC solenoid engages, increasing oil flow. An oil pressure gauge doesn't tell you the differential oil pressure, therefore doesn't tell you if the filter is going into bypass.
The PCX filter was designed to accomodate the FLOW of oil (forget pressure) during VTEC. Unless the Mobil filter is designed to have better or similar FLOW thruogh the media than the PCX filter, it is going into bypass. I posted a link earlier that suggests that Mobil 1 filters have significantly more differential pressure across the media than other filters, suggesting that the FLOW is less.
If this is true (and I suspect that it is, despite ZX-10's "facts"), then the engine is going into bypass during VTEC. You can argue that the increased wear would be negligible since film thickness increases with RPM (the slip-n'-slide effect) and the synthetic media will capture a little more wear metal that would otherwise show up in a UOA.
Two different lube filter strategies. I doubt that one is significantly better than the other. I also doubt that Ikeyballz will find much difference in his UOAs since his engine is in good shape and is running well. But if I were to encounter some engine problem in the future, I'd be more comfortable knowing that I had a higher flow filter.
The PCX filter was designed to accomodate the FLOW of oil (forget pressure) during VTEC. Unless the Mobil filter is designed to have better or similar FLOW thruogh the media than the PCX filter, it is going into bypass. I posted a link earlier that suggests that Mobil 1 filters have significantly more differential pressure across the media than other filters, suggesting that the FLOW is less.
If this is true (and I suspect that it is, despite ZX-10's "facts"), then the engine is going into bypass during VTEC. You can argue that the increased wear would be negligible since film thickness increases with RPM (the slip-n'-slide effect) and the synthetic media will capture a little more wear metal that would otherwise show up in a UOA.
Two different lube filter strategies. I doubt that one is significantly better than the other. I also doubt that Ikeyballz will find much difference in his UOAs since his engine is in good shape and is running well. But if I were to encounter some engine problem in the future, I'd be more comfortable knowing that I had a higher flow filter.
01-19-2009, 11:14 AM
#78
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 3,149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I posted a link earlier that suggests that Mobil 1 filters have significantly more differential pressure across the media than other filters, suggesting that the FLOW is less.
also, the expert I quoted on the previous page, who knows more about these filters than anyone on this little site, said this
In most cases the synthetic media/microglass type oil filters are a total win/win in that they not only are capable of much finer, efficient filtration (10 microns) but also have a lower Delta P (flow easier) and have a much greater dirt/contaminant capacity than a cellulose (normal paper) filter.
01-19-2009, 11:15 AM
#79
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 17 ft below sea level.
Posts: 4,949
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
16 Posts
2007 Zx-1 Posted on Jan 19 2009, 08:37 AM
The Amsoil EaO34 is an extended drain filter, as mentioned in the post.
The design is different and short term use does not show its potential.
Btw #1.. in that BITOG post the refer to the M1-104 as:
I'm not that impressed (in this case) by test results that
#1 - don't include the 15400-PCX-004
#2 - don't include the M1-104
It could be you mean the test results by ikeyballz: I'm pretty curious myself.
Btw #2 If Mobil1 was using MicroGlass in its filters it would say so.
In those words.
I still think that a mixture of synthetic micro fibers and natural fibers sounds exactly the same as cellulose – typically wood (that is natural.. right?) fiber – and polyester fibers
But thats just me.
As much as you like to dismiss this link, two consecutive results against Amsoil's best filter (certainly no piece of junk) are convincing evidence that the media in the M1 filters offers excellent performance....
The design is different and short term use does not show its potential.
Btw #1.. in that BITOG post the refer to the M1-104 as:
fairly ordinary alternative
prepare to eat crow, because I'm gonna be looking for you when these new test results come in
I'm not that impressed (in this case) by test results that
#1 - don't include the 15400-PCX-004
#2 - don't include the M1-104
It could be you mean the test results by ikeyballz: I'm pretty curious myself.
Btw #2 If Mobil1 was using MicroGlass in its filters it would say so.
In those words.
I still think that a mixture of synthetic micro fibers and natural fibers sounds exactly the same as cellulose – typically wood (that is natural.. right?) fiber – and polyester fibers
But thats just me.