oil filter
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 6,174
Likes: 1,960
From: Great State of Canada
Lotta riders (like me) are going to permanent filters now. They cost a lot but are simply a better filter.
If you're going with a paper filter, get the cheapest one that will fit. For all the good any of em do, you may as well save the money. If you're lucky, the paper element may even be intact.
If you're going with a paper filter, get the cheapest one that will fit. For all the good any of em do, you may as well save the money. If you're lucky, the paper element may even be intact.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 6,174
Likes: 1,960
From: Great State of Canada
Permanent filters are rated in "absolute" terms. Paper filters are rated in "nominal" terms.
http://www.mpfiltri.co.uk/faq/what-i...olute-ratings/
"Nominal" ratings are so inconsequential as to be useless even as a basis for comparison between different brands of "nominally" rated filters. Some filter makers go to rather artistic lengths to come up with their impressive sounding ratings, and that's being generously diplomatic about it.
No-one can argue that paper filters don't do the job. They've been around far too long for that. Just don't swallow the "rated at 5 micron" horse-****. They'll typically circulate 100 micron particles all day long and worse when their non-progressive bypass valves open up on cold starts or whenever you really nail it.
If it seems like I'm being a crusader for permanent filters, its only that I think people should understand the differences between them and stock filters when they're considering what to buy. Permanents are rated in "absolute" terms, have progressive bypass valves, and you get to see whats inside them both before and after they're used. The time / mess associated with permanent filter oil changes is "vastly" over stated by people who have never once used them. In reality oil changes aren't much different regardless of what filter you use. They're not just about saving the planet or long term parsimony but these too could apply if this is the sort of crap that actually appeals to the buyer. What they really are is an incrementally better filter which cost a lot more money than disposable paper ones. To know whether or not they're really worth it to you, you've got to at least understand the basic differences.
Hope this helps.
http://www.mpfiltri.co.uk/faq/what-i...olute-ratings/
"Nominal" ratings are so inconsequential as to be useless even as a basis for comparison between different brands of "nominally" rated filters. Some filter makers go to rather artistic lengths to come up with their impressive sounding ratings, and that's being generously diplomatic about it.
No-one can argue that paper filters don't do the job. They've been around far too long for that. Just don't swallow the "rated at 5 micron" horse-****. They'll typically circulate 100 micron particles all day long and worse when their non-progressive bypass valves open up on cold starts or whenever you really nail it.
If it seems like I'm being a crusader for permanent filters, its only that I think people should understand the differences between them and stock filters when they're considering what to buy. Permanents are rated in "absolute" terms, have progressive bypass valves, and you get to see whats inside them both before and after they're used. The time / mess associated with permanent filter oil changes is "vastly" over stated by people who have never once used them. In reality oil changes aren't much different regardless of what filter you use. They're not just about saving the planet or long term parsimony but these too could apply if this is the sort of crap that actually appeals to the buyer. What they really are is an incrementally better filter which cost a lot more money than disposable paper ones. To know whether or not they're really worth it to you, you've got to at least understand the basic differences.
Hope this helps.
Last edited by HKMark23; Sep 18, 2016 at 08:18 AM.
Trending Topics
The problem with all that permanent filter stuff is there's no evidence that any of it means anything.
Back in engineering school, I had a professor who liked to use the phrase "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a piece of chalk, cut it with an axe."
What he meant by that is that accuracy and precision are only meaningful if they are actually relevant in a specific engineering context. For example, consider the steel building that THC just built. It's made from a bunch of beams that are bolted together. The straightness of the building depends on the precision with which the holes are drilled into the beams. The engineering question then becomes "How precise is precise enough, and at what point is money spent on additional precision wasted?" No doubt it is theoretically possible to drill the holes in the beam with sub-micron precision. It is also true that anything within something like 1/16" is probably good enough.
In the case of engine oil and oil filters, I've never seen any evidence that filtration beyond that provided by OEM (or equivalent) filters makes any difference in any meaningful way. Sure, you can point to filter "X" and say it "filters better" than OEM, but what evidence do you have that it matters? Is the engine going to run cooler? Is the engine going to produce more power? Is the engine going to last longer? I think the answers to those questions are all speculative.
I don't have any evidence that those filters are going to hurt anything other than your wallet, but I don't understand what problem you think you are solving by using them.
Back in engineering school, I had a professor who liked to use the phrase "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a piece of chalk, cut it with an axe."
What he meant by that is that accuracy and precision are only meaningful if they are actually relevant in a specific engineering context. For example, consider the steel building that THC just built. It's made from a bunch of beams that are bolted together. The straightness of the building depends on the precision with which the holes are drilled into the beams. The engineering question then becomes "How precise is precise enough, and at what point is money spent on additional precision wasted?" No doubt it is theoretically possible to drill the holes in the beam with sub-micron precision. It is also true that anything within something like 1/16" is probably good enough.
In the case of engine oil and oil filters, I've never seen any evidence that filtration beyond that provided by OEM (or equivalent) filters makes any difference in any meaningful way. Sure, you can point to filter "X" and say it "filters better" than OEM, but what evidence do you have that it matters? Is the engine going to run cooler? Is the engine going to produce more power? Is the engine going to last longer? I think the answers to those questions are all speculative.
I don't have any evidence that those filters are going to hurt anything other than your wallet, but I don't understand what problem you think you are solving by using them.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,193
Likes: 3,080
From: NW AR
That's a good point, Omaha. It is like the "statin" drugs. BIG money maker. People with lower cholesterol have less problems. Statins will lower your cholesterol count, as measured by cholesterol blood tests. However, there was no evidence that lowering your cholesterol count by taking statin drugs would actually increase your life span or lower the risk for a heart attack, stroke, etc. It took TEN YEARS and a butt load of money to come up with ONE study that showed that lowering your cholesterol with statin drugs did any good at all.
Dirt don't hurt
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 21,059
Likes: 4,534
From: Haslet Texas
The problem with all that permanent filter stuff is there's no evidence that any of it means anything.
Back in engineering school, I had a professor who liked to use the phrase "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a piece of chalk, cut it with an axe."
What he meant by that is that accuracy and precision are only meaningful if they are actually relevant in a specific engineering context. For example, consider the steel building that THC just built. It's made from a bunch of beams that are bolted together. The straightness of the building depends on the precision with which the holes are drilled into the beams. The engineering question then becomes "How precise is precise enough, and at what point is money spent on additional precision wasted?" No doubt it is theoretically possible to drill the holes in the beam with sub-micron precision. It is also true that anything within something like 1/16" is probably good enough.
In the case of engine oil and oil filters, I've never seen any evidence that filtration beyond that provided by OEM (or equivalent) filters makes any difference in any meaningful way. Sure, you can point to filter "X" and say it "filters better" than OEM, but what evidence do you have that it matters? Is the engine going to run cooler? Is the engine going to produce more power? Is the engine going to last longer? I think the answers to those questions are all speculative.
I don't have any evidence that those filters are going to hurt anything other than your wallet, but I don't understand what problem you think you are solving by using them.
Back in engineering school, I had a professor who liked to use the phrase "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a piece of chalk, cut it with an axe."
What he meant by that is that accuracy and precision are only meaningful if they are actually relevant in a specific engineering context. For example, consider the steel building that THC just built. It's made from a bunch of beams that are bolted together. The straightness of the building depends on the precision with which the holes are drilled into the beams. The engineering question then becomes "How precise is precise enough, and at what point is money spent on additional precision wasted?" No doubt it is theoretically possible to drill the holes in the beam with sub-micron precision. It is also true that anything within something like 1/16" is probably good enough.
In the case of engine oil and oil filters, I've never seen any evidence that filtration beyond that provided by OEM (or equivalent) filters makes any difference in any meaningful way. Sure, you can point to filter "X" and say it "filters better" than OEM, but what evidence do you have that it matters? Is the engine going to run cooler? Is the engine going to produce more power? Is the engine going to last longer? I think the answers to those questions are all speculative.
I don't have any evidence that those filters are going to hurt anything other than your wallet, but I don't understand what problem you think you are solving by using them.
Not that it invalidates your point in any way.