Engine oil filters

[jon laing]

I have an original 1939-- 85 hp ford. Many claim that the original oil filters do very little. If I change the oil every 1000 miles with 30 wt. and only drive in summer should I consider innstalling a modern oil filter or is that overkill? Jon Laing

[34PKUP]

What do you mean by 'modern' filter.

[Walt Dupont--Me.]

If you use HD oil and change every 1000 miles I'd say the filter is overkill. Walt

[Kurt in NJ]

A bypass filter like the original will remove finer particles that a "full flow" type filter

Most ring and bearing wear is caused by particles under 20 microns

a bypass filter will remove 98% of 2 micron sized particles

A full flow filter most likely will open the internal bypass valve on cold startup and not filter till the oil thins some, then ---
40% at 10 microns
60% at 20 microns
90% at30 microns
97% at 40 microns
87% capture rate for single pass ----
the "full flow" filter has to be a compromise between filtering and flow, the ideal setup would be a combination of full flow and bypass

The million mile Mercedes only had a bypass filter

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by Kurt in NJ

A bypass filter like the original will remove finer particles that a "full flow" type filter

Most ring and bearing wear is caused by particles under 20 microns

a bypass filter will remove 98% of 2 micron sized particles

A full flow filter most likely will open the internal bypass valve on cold startup and not filter till the oil thins some, then ---
40% at 10 microns
60% at 20 microns
90% at30 microns
97% at 40 microns
87% capture rate for single pass ----
the "full flow" filter has to be a compromise between filtering and flow, the ideal setup would be a combination of full flow and bypass

The million mile Mercedes only had a bypass filter

Ditto's on the bypass filter.
Replaced the original with an Amsoil bypass filter.
For those who say that a bypass filter only filters 10 percent of the oil
I have found that 5 qts. ( measured) of oil goes thru the filter every 10 minutes of run time.

[jon laing]

Sponsored Links (Register now to hide all advertisements)

My idea of a modern filter is a filter that is much more efficient than the original 1939 filters. Doesn't NAPA have such an animal? Sounds like overkill is the answer to my question. Jon Laing

[Gary in La.]

OVERKILL. If you use a good HD 30 wt oil and change the filter cartridge at 1000 miles you are fine. Much better products now than what they had when the car was new.
NAPA filter #1006 is all I've ever used.

[19Fordy]

Jon, If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Kurt in NJ]

The original 1939 type filter is a "depth" type filter, they are very good at removing fine particles --much better than a modern "paper" surface filter, the tecnology in the 1939 filter is still being used, it just costs more, what kind of "more efficient" are you looking for ---cheaper, easier to use,more debris holding capacity or finer debris removal?

[Ronnie]

Here is a cut and past to read on filtration.

I would like to clarify some points regarding Microns and Micron ratings for the non engineers, scientists and Tribologists among us (most of us).

Micron ratings are how oil, fuel, hydraulic and other liquid filters efficiency are measured. What is a Micron? It’s the size measurement given to microscopic particles. A human hair for instance is 40-80 microns wide.

When talking about Micron ratings there are two different ratings commonly referred to or given to a filter.

The Nominal Rating which is basically this. The smallest size particle the filter will catch 50% of the time on a consistent basis. The Nominal rating is just a way to get a lower number in the marketing and really doesn’t mean anything to you and I where our trucks are concerned. For instance the Baldwin B7039 is a direct replacement for the Motorcraft FL1995 oil filter. Baldwin’s B7039 has a Nominal rating of 12 microns. That means that 12 Microns is the smallest particle it will catch 50% of the time. Who cares about 50% of the time?

The next and most important rating is the Absolute Rating. The absolute rating is this. The smallest particle the filter will catch 98.7% of the time. This is the rating you should be asking for when you are researching your filters. For instance the Baldwin B7039 has an Absolute Rating of 25 Microns. The smallest particle it will catch 98.7% of the time is 25 microns.

However my explanation of the Absolute Ratings needs to be broken down a little more. Let us talk about Beta ratios and how they work as they are critical to really knowing how the filter can actually perform and are not as easily manipulated as a Nominal or Absolute number can be the unknowing consumer.

“Nominal” ratings are ok when nothing else is known; as some info is always better than no info. And “nominal” ratings can help compare one filter to another, but only at 50% efficiency.

There is a much better way to compare filters, though. Beta ratios are a multi-level rating of the efficiency of a filter. Some filters can be very good at one particle size, but poor at another. Beta ratings allow us to understand how a filter performs overall. While it is not an exact correlation, it can be presumed to reasonably represent both the “nominal” and near-absolute ratings. I say “near” because it is not set in stone where the rating is done. But the general concept is that the Beta rating gives a wider range of efficiency visualization. A very common Beta rating is “2 / 20 = x / y”

Beta ratings are read in a particular way, and some basic math must be applied. Betas are stated as two fractions, each representing a ratio. Please understand that it is NOT the actual fraction you are using, but rather the numbers as individual values. They are merely stated as a “fraction” for the purpose of easy short-hand notation.

You must take the first number (upper number) as an inverse to the number “1” (one), and then subtract that resultant percentage from a whole of 100%. This applies for the upper and lower numbers individually. Then you use the second fractional value as individual number to know what micro size the rating is stated at. Here’s an example.

Beta rating of: “2 / 20 = 13 / 23”

The “2” is taken as a percentage, when divided into “1”; i.e. 1 / 2 (one-half), or 50% missed. So 100% particles minus 50% missed = 50% caught.

The “20” is taken as a percentage, when also divided into “1”; 1/20 (one-twentieth) or 5%. So 100% particles minus 5% missed = 95% caught.

The “13” is the particle size at the 50% rating. In other words, 50% of the time the filter catches particles that are at, or larger than, 13 microns in size.

The “23” is the particle size at the 95% rating. In other words, 95% of the time the filter catches particles that are at, or larger than, 23 microns in size.

Using this formula allows you to understand how a filter does its job with both large and small particles, and how efficient it is at those particular ratings. It is a much better view of the filter’s abilities as a whole.

If you can find out the Beta Ratio on your filter I suggest you do so. If you can’t get the Beta Ratio on your filter the Absolute rating for your filter will be the next best thing to find out. Brand shouldn’t play a role in your decisions for a filter Beta Ration or Absolute Micron rating should. If you care about your truck and want to make it last for a long time use the best Beta Ratio (if available) or Absolute Rating filters you can buy regardless of cost. It’s the best thing for your investment in a Diesel truck. If you want to improve on what is available to you, install a bypass or Dual bypass filtration system. It is said by oil industry experts and Tribologists that if you can filter to and below 5 microns you will virtually eliminate the wear particles that cause damage to the internals of our engines. From that point you will wear out the additive package in the oil and not the oil itself or your engine.

Thank you to my sources for this writing:

Dave Newton
The Baldwin Filter Company
Amsoil Corporation

[tubman]

My take on this is slightly different. These days, we hardly ever drive on dirt roads. The ambient "dirt load" in the air has got to be much less than it was when these cars were new. When I had my first '51 Ford, I would bet at least 50% of my driving was on dirt roads, and that was in the late '50's, early 60's. At that time, a full flow filter would probably been very advantageous given the conditions, and the oil change intervals on those old used cars. These days, these cars are pampered, driven less, and given much more frequent oil changes with superior oil. Plus, when I was a kid, it was normal to change the filter every 3 to 5 oil changes (anybody else remember that?). That would NEVER happen today.

Bottom line, given the overall environment, bypass filters are probably better for these cars than full flow filters for many of the reasons above and those given by others here.

IMHO 19Fordy is absolutely right on the money.

[John R]

Lots of good, solid factual info in this thread. Thanks to those who contributed.
The combination full flow and bypass systems mentioned in Kurt's post are available for big trucks.

[texas webb]

Very good read.I would say tho that the ambient dirt load in todays air is
quite a bit more than the 50's&60's.

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by John R

The combination full flow and bypass systems mentioned in Kurt's post are available for big trucks.

They are not only available for big trucks but virtually all vehicles, you could put the dual system on a flathead.

[tubman]

Originally Posted by texas webb

Very good read.I would say tho that the ambient dirt load in todays air is
quite a bit more than the 50's&60's.

Not where I live!

[Mtn Wudy]

Who here remembers the FRANZ toilet paper oil filters ?? Cleaning up some boxes of my old parts ,I ran across one of these units.What was the pros n cons of these..They claimed the oil even stayed clear like when you changed it..

[tubman]

My dad was a rep for Franz in the early '60's. He had them on all of his cars. They came with a special door jamb sticker (like a regular oil change sticker) that was made of blotter paper, and had 5 separate areas delimited. You were supposed to put it on your car next to the regular oil change sticker, and touch your dipstick to it every 200 miles. It would leave a little spot of oil on the sticker. You could actually see the oil get cleaner as the miles rolled by. I don't know if it was a trick or not, but it really worked. Of course, they only made sense on a car that already had a full flow filter.

[51 MERC-CT]

Originally Posted by Mtn Wudy

Who here remembers the FRANZ toilet paper oil filters ?? Cleaning up some boxes of my old parts ,I ran across one of these units.What was the pros n cons of these..They claimed the oil even stayed clear like when you changed it..

They are a by-pass filter system that used toilet paper as a replacement element. They are still around.
See here---
http://www.frantzoil.com/servicing_video_soon.html

[gary635g]

Recently sold one on Ebay for $70 My step Dad had it a 53 Willy's station wagon.

[Rand]

My grandfather in my avatar was a mechanic that had a shop in South Gate, Cali. in the old days. As a kid I remember seeing them on his Dodge Baracuda and remember him talking about how good those TP filters worked.
His good friend is in the avatar picture with him. Some guy by the name of Wally Parks. And thats my Mom on his lap
Randy