Honda Car Forum

"Tegger®" <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote in message news:<Xns9501C64B85608teggeratistop@207.14.113.17> ...
> y_p_w@hotmail.com (y_p_w) spake unto the masses in
> news:591da479.0406071147.37250538@posting.google.c om:
>
> >
> > Outsourcing a few parts here or there isn't all that difficult.
>
>
>
> Well no. Go to Wal-Mart and look down one of the aisles. Some 90% of the
> stuff there was not made by the company whose name is on the package.
>
>
> > However - I could still imagine
> > stamping metal endcaps in the US.
>
> You can "imagine" making the endcaps in the US? What does that mean? Please
> explain.

There are still manufacturing operations in the US that stamp sheet
metal and do so at competetive prices. That little piece of steel
costs mere cents whether it is made in the US, Far East, or Eastern
Europe.

> > As for cardboard, I remember the comments about the Fram cardboard
> > endcaps collapsing in some forced induction engines - most notably the
> > supercharged VW G60 engine in the Corrado.
>
> 1) Were they OEM filters or some chepie picked up at Wal-Mart that may or
> may not have been compatible with the stresses found in that engine?

It's been a while, but I suppose the standard part as specified in the
Fram applications manual. That's certainly what most people would
use.

> 2) If the endcaps had been steel instead of gasket material, would it be
> better to have the pleat fold over or the medium separate from the
> adhesive, as opposed to having the endcap fold?

I don't quite understand what you're getting at. My contention is
that the cardboard is less capable of handling extreme stresses.
There have been known cases where the cardboard has disintegrated
plugging up the media, followed by the bypass opening up and spewing
out the disintegrated cardboard.

My favorite is one guy who just wanted to test Fram vs Wix on an old
car ready for the scrapheap. He used both a Wix and a Fram for 16K
miles. The Wix was still intact after an extended period of time,
but the Fram had turned into a mess. He worked for Dana Corp (maker
of Wix), and said he sent the used Fram to their analysis lab "as a
joke". I know that's "abuse", but it certain highlights that Fram is
generally not a good choice for "robustness" of design/materials.

<http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3619174097d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=7Cqu5.223984%24Gh.4991317%40news20.bellglob al.com>

> > I've also taken apart a
> > Fram filter after a mere 500 miles use, and noticed that some carboard
> > fibers had already started separating.
>
>
> How do you know they weren't that way before the filter was installed? How
> many of these have you disassembled before installation?

Two, including a PH6811 and a PH3593A. The cardboard had no signs
of "flaking-off" when dry. I've also opened up an AC PF1127 (Champion
Labs design) and an AC PF47.

> Have you conducted an analysis of the filter and the oil to determine if
> the fibers have actually been separating or just *look like they might do
> so?

Some fibers were actually "flapping in the wind".

George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message news:<j6oac0dd9al4umsn2r7a8pgv3lm7v4rbhf@4ax.com>. ..
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 22:32:01 -0700, alan <no-longer-valid@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >George Macdonald wrote:
> >
> >> You can put the indictment of Fram at the minimopar Web site down to
> >> employee discontent if you like - that's your choice. Personally I give it
> >> somewhat more credence - my choice!
> >>
> >
> >I don't mind paying $2 more every 6 months for a Purolator Pure One
> >filter. It has sparkly paint, and it makes me feel smug.
>
> Yep, that's what I've used when Honda brand Filtechs were not available and
> I can buy them till 9p.m. on a weekday.:-) It's till not clear to me if
> we'll be able to buy Honda brand Filtechs in the new form factor, though
> the part does appear to exist.

Well - I've moved on to my 2004 Subaru Impreza WRX, where the factory
oil filters are either made by Tokyo Roki (not to be confused with
Toyo Roki) in Japan, or Purolator in the US. I got a nice stash of
the former purchased mailorder.

However - I still have my '95 Integra GS-R, which I plan on changing
the oil and filter every 6 months with limited mileage. I exhausted
my supply of Filtech and Toyo Roki filters. I ended up using a
Hastings filter for my last oil change.

On 8 Jun 2004 09:54:51 GMT, "Tegger®"
<teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote:

>George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> spake unto the
>masses in news:vq9ac0dbmh14v37prsheb1sh6ihvgosrv4@4ax.com:
>
>> Obviously you haven't heard about the new Supertechs. Did you even
>> look at the NTPOG site?
>
>
>
>The NTPOG contains some silly comments. Silly enough to make me wonder how
>qualified these guys really are.

As already noted, they're not claiming to be "qualified" - just looking at
construction quality from an obvious eye-ball point. Interpret as your
needs dictate.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:09:32 -0700, Sean Dinh <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com>
wrote:

>The first paragraph I skimmed through was the description of the bypass valve. Since the description was already flawed, I did not
>bother to read the rest.

It might have been expressed better but I don't see anything seriously
flawed here - can you elaborate please?

>I just looked at the picture of the Supertech filter since you insisted again. There is an obvious difference in the bypass valve in
>that picture than the one on I used last month. I can't comment on the actual function of the bypass valve at this time. I need further
>analyzing. I find the author trashing the operation of the bypass valve highly suspicious. Walmart won't be dumb enough waste money on a
>defective design. Imagine the litigations...I would not comment had the author did a pressure test.

OK - trust Walmart and their auto expert buyer.<shrug>... who has
apparently decided, after gaining some repuatation for having a decent
moderately priced filter on the shelf, to switch a cheap import.

>George Macdonald wrote:
>
>> Obviously you haven't heard about the new Supertechs. Did you even look at
>> the NTPOG site?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> spake unto the
masses in news:hludc0dihis0kqupma57c3m7eh1v6k58kd@4ax.com:

> On 8 Jun 2004 09:54:51 GMT, "Tegger®"
> <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote:
>
>>George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> spake unto the
>>masses in news:vq9ac0dbmh14v37prsheb1sh6ihvgosrv4@4ax.com:
>>
>>> Obviously you haven't heard about the new Supertechs. Did you even
>>> look at the NTPOG site?
>>
>>
>>
>>The NTPOG contains some silly comments. Silly enough to make me wonder
>>how qualified these guys really are.
>
> As already noted, they're not claiming to be "qualified" - just
> looking at construction quality from an obvious eye-ball point.
> Interpret as your needs dictate.



"Obvious eyeball" is not a credible method of evaluation for something that
operates unseen to the eye and operates on a microscopic level. Can your
eyes determine filtration characteristics?

To even suggest NPOG at all as a credible resource here is to contribute to
"Internet wisdom", as to suggest reading that Website is to suggest that
they are qualified to comment.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda FAQ
http://www3.telus.net/public/johnings/faq.html

How to find anything on the Internet or in Usenet Groups:
www.google.com
www.groups.google.com

Let me elaborate beyond just the bypass valve;

Bypass valve need like 10 psi to open. It does not need 'pressure spike' nor 'very high rpm' to open, nor does it need the filter media to be
clogged to function. Since the filter media is quite dense, and the oil's viscosity is quite high, the flow rate is not that high through a
filter. When the oil flow is raised, the pressure inside the filter rise exponentially. At a certain flow rate, the pressure inside the
filter rise to a point until the bypass valve open. Bypass valve could open at low rpm and bypass most oil at high rpm. Stating that bypass
valve only open at severe operating condition is flawed.

Certain web site has flow rate for their filters. Using info from that site to pick flow rate and bypass valve pressure, and oil flow rate
from a particular engine's oil pump, the rpm at which the bypass valve would open could be determined. It's been a long time since I
calculated, so my figure of the bypass valve beginning to open at 1300 rpm on the Odyssey could be off a bit.

There are vast number of particles suspended in the oil. Certain particle sizes affect wear, whereas very fine particles has little effect.
This critical size escape me at the moment. If the filter media is too dense, it traps fine particles well. This lead to clogged filter early
in its service life. Clogged filter will open the bypass valve all the time. This is not good.

Filter media has limited capacity to trap particles, that's why the media has to be selected carefully. Best filter media is the one that
only trap wear particles and last the service life. Selecting filter media to trap particles above critical size is a science. This requires
flow test. I doubt that most of us could determine a good filter media by merely looking at it with naked eyes.

There is a correlation between surface area of the media and its capacity. The more surface area the media has, the more particles it could
trap. However, there is no correlation as to its effectiveness when the comparison is between different media. All those filter tables are
nearly useless.

My point is that visual observation has little correlation to the performance of a bypass type oil filter.

George Macdonald wrote:

> It might have been expressed better but I don't see anything seriously
> flawed here - can you elaborate please?

On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:37:25 -0700, Sean Dinh <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com>
wrote:

>Let me elaborate beyond just the bypass valve;
>
>Bypass valve need like 10 psi to open. It does not need 'pressure spike' nor 'very high rpm' to open, nor does it need the filter media to be
>clogged to function. Since the filter media is quite dense, and the oil's viscosity is quite high, the flow rate is not that high through a
>filter. When the oil flow is raised, the pressure inside the filter rise exponentially. At a certain flow rate, the pressure inside the
>filter rise to a point until the bypass valve open. Bypass valve could open at low rpm and bypass most oil at high rpm. Stating that bypass
>valve only open at severe operating condition is flawed.

The mfr's specified bypass opening pressure is mentioned for each filter in
his spreadsheet... if you'd bothered to look at it, so I think he knows
that. The pressure here is a differential pressure across a filter medium
- only secondarily related to absolute oil pressure; in fact one normally
hopes that *most* of the pump's oil pressure makes it through the filter
media, otherwise you're going to have wrecked bearings or perpetual
by-pass... in which case the filter would be a waste of time. I don't see
anything particularly bad with his explanation of a bypass valve. IOW
you're nit-picking.

>Certain web site has flow rate for their filters. Using info from that site to pick flow rate and bypass valve pressure, and oil flow rate
>from a particular engine's oil pump, the rpm at which the bypass valve would open could be determined. It's been a long time since I
>calculated, so my figure of the bypass valve beginning to open at 1300 rpm on the Odyssey could be off a bit.

I dunno when or where you mentioned 1300rpm but think you're way off!

>There are vast number of particles suspended in the oil. Certain particle sizes affect wear, whereas very fine particles has little effect.
>This critical size escape me at the moment. If the filter media is too dense, it traps fine particles well. This lead to clogged filter early
>in its service life. Clogged filter will open the bypass valve all the time. This is not good.
>
>Filter media has limited capacity to trap particles, that's why the media has to be selected carefully. Best filter media is the one that
>only trap wear particles and last the service life. Selecting filter media to trap particles above critical size is a science. This requires
>flow test. I doubt that most of us could determine a good filter media by merely looking at it with naked eyes.

I think it's fair, given the application, to expect that, if the only
criterion was oil filter effectiveness, all the filter mfrs would use
almost identical filter media. The fact that there are palpable, visible
differences seems to indicate that the "science" is not the only
consideration being used in the manufacturing specs... maybe cost?:-)

>There is a correlation between surface area of the media and its capacity. The more surface area the media has, the more particles it could
>trap. However, there is no correlation as to its effectiveness when the comparison is between different media. All those filter tables are
>nearly useless.

Stating the obvious does not somehow seem to prove the point you want to
make about the "tables".

>My point is that visual observation has little correlation to the performance of a bypass type oil filter.

The point is that all the mfrs are selling a product for the same purpose:
same oil, same particles, same pressures. I see nothing wrong with looking
at the quality of the materials used to achieve that... especially when
there are glaring deficiencies.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On 10 Jun 2004 01:16:18 GMT, "Tegger®"
<teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote:

>George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> spake unto the
>masses in news:hludc0dihis0kqupma57c3m7eh1v6k58kd@4ax.com:
>
>> On 8 Jun 2004 09:54:51 GMT, "Tegger®"
>> <teggeratistopdotcom@changetheobvious.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>George Macdonald <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> spake unto the
>>>masses in news:vq9ac0dbmh14v37prsheb1sh6ihvgosrv4@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Obviously you haven't heard about the new Supertechs. Did you even
>>>> look at the NTPOG site?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>The NTPOG contains some silly comments. Silly enough to make me wonder
>>>how qualified these guys really are.
>>
>> As already noted, they're not claiming to be "qualified" - just
>> looking at construction quality from an obvious eye-ball point.
>> Interpret as your needs dictate.
>
>
>
>"Obvious eyeball" is not a credible method of evaluation for something that
>operates unseen to the eye and operates on a microscopic level. Can your
>eyes determine filtration characteristics?

When looking at several products which all have the same purpose and
operating parameters, you have to make certain assumptions about how the
product specs and materials were arrived at. Ideally one would think that
every filter would be identical in choice of materials and construction if
the science were the only criterion. I think one can make certain
judgements about the quality of materials and fitness for use by looking at
an oil filter before and after use.

>To even suggest NPOG at all as a credible resource here is to contribute to
>"Internet wisdom", as to suggest reading that Website is to suggest that
>they are qualified to comment.

Your insistence on declaring everything which doesn't fit your prejudices
as "Internet wisdom" is getting boring. Suggesting that people read a Web
site only means that I think it's worth reading... and IMO it *is*. It
does not mean that I endorse every single detail presented.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

On 6 Jun 2004 21:25:40 -0700, jmattis@attglobal.net (JM) wrote:

||No, didn't cut it apart, but when I performed a close visual
||inspection of the exterior surfaces of both the FRAM and the STech, as
||well as the interior valving area which was visualized through the
||threaded hole, they looked virtually identical.
||
||As to FRAM, I don't care if the ends are cardboard; cardboard doesn't
||dissolve in oil. But they have a crappy anti-drainback valve, and are
||short on a decent amount of high-quality filtering media. Just like
||their crappy air filters.
||
||Supertech is a $2 (two dollar) oil filter at walmart. Does ANYTHING
||need to be said after that?

If it's made by Champ Labs, I'd use them. Much better than any Fram.
Champ Labs makes a lot of the ACDelco SKUs. Not that that's a quality
endorsement by any means
Texas Parts Guy

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:34:27 -0400, George Macdonald
<fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote:

||On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:51:20 -0700, Sean Dinh <"seanny"@dinh@znet.com>
||wrote:
||
||>The purposes of the end caps are to hold the filter media in the folded
state, and to seal the inlet from the outlet. Without them,
||>the filter would flatten out. Taking the filter element out of its protective
case and then putting it on the table to exam its
||>structural strength point to major flaw in the observer's method. With the
element on the table, you could flick your finger to
||>bend the cardboard end cap. Try doing that with the backing of the case
against that cardboard end caps and tell me how your finger
||>feel.
||
||The endcaps are an important part of the structure of the cartridge and its
||structural integrity. The endcap does *not* butt against the "backing of
||the case", not fully anyway, otherwise there would be no way to allow a
||bypass down the center tube of the filter. In fact it is held away from
||the inside end of the case by a leaf spring in most filters.

Leaf Spring is being generous. Actually, it most resembles a halloween clicker.
I've hung around sports cars most of my life. The only filters I have ever seen
to fail catastrophically have been Fram oil filters.
A lot of the dirt track guys used to use small-block Chevy's with the old
cartridge filter. The cardboard Frams would often come out squashed like a beer
can. Didn't take long for them to switch to Wix.
Texas Parts Guy