Which Oil Filter? (poll) - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > Grand Cherokee General Discussion > Which Oil Filter? (poll)

Introducing MONSTALINER™ UV Permanent DIY Roll On Bed LineGrizzly Lockers available at Rockridge4wd.comThe ULTIMATE "Selectable" Locker System! Brough

View Poll Results: Which Oil Filter?
Mopar 14 32.56%
Fram (regular) 4 9.30%
Fram (Tough Guard) 3 6.98%
Other (please list) 22 51.16%
Voters: 43. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Unread 04-08-2009, 06:59 PM   #1
adgjqetuo
Registered User
2004 WJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Langhorne, PA
Posts: 1,188
Which Oil Filter? (poll)







__________________
Mike

13 Subaru Outback Limited - Current
04 Jeep grand Cherokee Overland - 23k ~ 71k - Sold
98 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo SE - 73k ~ 150k - Sold
adgjqetuo is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 07:07 PM   #2
tfgnt16
Registered User
2009 WK 
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 316
Amsoil filter. NEVER use Fram, worst garbage on the market.
__________________
2001 WJ Laredo 4.0L - Sold!
2009 WK Limited 5.7L HEMI
tfgnt16 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 07:20 PM   #3
Greeeeenberg
Registered User
1997 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Suring, WI/ Houghton, MI (School-MTU)
Posts: 1,157
GO with a wix brand or amsoil. THere is a thread here already bout it search it out.
__________________
97 ZJ Orvis 5.2 108K.

Michigan Tech Jeepers Member #1
Greeeeenberg is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 07:25 PM   #4
vansskaterfreek
Registered User
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: ocean city, nj
Posts: 486
go with the "090" mopar filter, it has a valve in it that helps protect your engine... do a search... lots or people have looked into this by cutting open different brands of filters
__________________
1998 ZJ 5.9L 122k miles - DD, 242 swap, 3.5" RE, 32" BFG M/T, safari rack, roof-mounted lights, custom steel front bumper with hitch reciever, 10k winch :)
2004 WJ 4.7L 107k miles - her daily driver, 2" daystar BB with scorpion shocks.. not too bad! stuffed 265/65/17 General Grabber AT2'S
vansskaterfreek is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 07:44 PM   #5
gatorayde
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 3,334
Wix

10char
gatorayde is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 08:01 PM   #6
Virmagicus
Headed Out West
 
Virmagicus's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Northern Indiana
Posts: 6,428
Napa Gold (wix) Ftw !!!!!!!!
Virmagicus is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 08:56 PM   #7
xJoshxx
Web Wheeler
 
xJoshxx's Avatar
2012 WK 
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Burlington, Kentucky
Posts: 5,500
Amsoil EAO42 i believe for inline 6's 4.0

AMSOIL FTW hands down.
__________________
Interested in Amsoil? Sold4" Hybrid lift TeraFlex coils IRO Adjustable LA's Jks tracbar 1.25spidertrax spacers 265/75/16 Dura-tracs
Quote:
Originally Posted by moPowered View Post
The SRt-8's are a liberty design.
2011 WK2 ORA2
2012 WK2 SRT8
xJoshxx is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:12 PM   #8
rustynail
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, British Columbia
Posts: 1,108
I'm likely to get flamed here but I think the tough guard is the one product that fram makes that's any good. It is supposed to have 99% filtration where as all of their other filters are 96%. I guess I use it because they sell them at the lordco by my house and I change my oil every 3000 kms > trail rig. I would not leave any fram on for extended time or kms. It would likely plug up quicker than others so it is probably the worst filter for synthetic where you want it on there a little longer. I guess if other companies advertised that they had a filter that filtered 99% I would go that direction because I know that overall fram sucks.

Off topic here but I love that I can set the VIC to remind me to change the oil at 3000kms instead of 5000kms
__________________
- Russ
5.9 ORVIS 33x12.5 MTR-Kevlar, 7" fr adj IR LA's, 7" rr adj RE SF SA's, adj JKS TB's, RE SB disc, RE Springs, JKS ACOS, 13" RS9000XL's, OME SS, NP231, Durango box, IR Sliders, IR Skid, 3" Flowmaster 70, K&N, Superwinch EPi9.0, Optima Yel, 2 air comp, Alpine, Garmin, Sunroof
rustynail is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:18 PM   #9
Ridin' Around
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, Illinois
Posts: 2,212
Wix or Amsoil for sure!!!

There is hardly a difference in the Orange & Grey Fram filters. They are bothe cardboard on the inside! At least the Mopar uses metal end caps on the filter media.
Then notice the Wix & Amsoil use coils springs for better ADB valve sealing & it will keep the filter from sticking in By-Pass mode.
Then on the Amsoil filter, note the synthetic media and How much bigger the ADB valve is. There is a difference, as you can see here.









Ridin' Around is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:19 PM   #10
gatorayde
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 3,334
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZJ-Orvis View Post
I'm likely to get flamed here but I think the tough guard is the one product that fram makes that's any good. It is supposed to have 99% filtration where as all of their other filters are 96%.
Trust the TG all you want, I know I won't:
http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/showp...1&postcount=16
gatorayde is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:25 PM   #11
newfieZJ
Registered User
1995 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: , Alberta
Posts: 6,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by virmagicus View Post
Napa Gold (wix) Ftw !!!!!!!!
x2 , good filters , easily found in Canada , Napa is everywhere

press the set button , the hours start to flash , cycle through until you hit the service mileage , hold the set button . I might have the buttons mixed up
newfieZJ is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:26 PM   #12
Ridin' Around
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, Illinois
Posts: 2,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZJ-Orvis View Post
I'm likely to get flamed here but I think the tough guard is the one product that fram makes that's any good. It is supposed to have 99% filtration where as all of their other filters are 96%. I guess I use it because they sell them at the lordco by my house and I change my oil every 3000 kms > trail rig. I would not leave any fram on for extended time or kms. It would likely plug up quicker than others so it is probably the worst filter for synthetic where you want it on there a little longer. I guess if other companies advertised that they had a filter that filtered 99% I would go that direction because I know that overall fram sucks.

Off topic here but I love that I can set the VIC to remind me to change the oil at 3000kms instead of 5000kms
Just a question, no flaming please (by anyone) but do you know what micron rating they get that 99% rating at. And it is a single pass nominal rating. I know the answer, but i will give some of you a chance to answer. Look up the difference between nominal & absolute ratings while your at it. It could filter stuff the size of a pea at 100%, I bet.

Let's have a good discussion on this and everyone can learn something here.
Ridin' Around is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 09:28 PM   #13
snowden9
Registered User
2006 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Leominster,Ma.
Posts: 22
Amsoil the right choice
snowden9 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-08-2009, 10:17 PM   #14
rustynail
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, British Columbia
Posts: 1,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridin' Around View Post
Just a question, no flaming please (by anyone) but do you know what micron rating they get that 99% rating at. And it is a single pass nominal rating. I know the answer, but i will give some of you a chance to answer. Look up the difference between nominal & absolute ratings while your at it. It could filter stuff the size of a pea at 100%, I bet.

Let's have a good discussion on this and everyone can learn something here.
I'm not going to look up all that stuff. I'm not an oil filter scientist like yourself. I just avoid the super cheap filters and I'm sure I don't need the best filter on the market for my 3000 km oil changes. This topic could easily get right out of hand even though they are all new car manufacturer approved.
__________________
- Russ
5.9 ORVIS 33x12.5 MTR-Kevlar, 7" fr adj IR LA's, 7" rr adj RE SF SA's, adj JKS TB's, RE SB disc, RE Springs, JKS ACOS, 13" RS9000XL's, OME SS, NP231, Durango box, IR Sliders, IR Skid, 3" Flowmaster 70, K&N, Superwinch EPi9.0, Optima Yel, 2 air comp, Alpine, Garmin, Sunroof
rustynail is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Unread 04-09-2009, 12:01 AM   #15
Ridin' Around
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, Illinois
Posts: 2,212
STOLEN FROM ANOTHER WEB SITE, I DID NOT WRITE THIS


If you do any research on your own, you'll find that most manufacturers no longer use micron levels to rate their filters. This is a result of some manufacturers' shady representation of their filters using micron ratings. You see, some filter manufacturers would indicate that their filters would remove x micron particles and leave it at that ("x" being whatever arbitrary number they chose to print). Of course, consumers would take this to mean that all particles larger than this micron level would be removed, which is not necessarily the case.

The truth is that chicken wire will remove 5 micron particles. It will even remove 1 micron particles. BUT, it will not do so with very good efficiency. The key is, how efficient is the filter at removing x micron particles. If you don't know how efficient it is at a certain level, the micron rating means nothing.

So, most companies have gotten away from micron ratings (to avoid the confusion) and have gone to an overall efficiency rating. In other words, an industry standard test is used in which oil is contaminated with a certain number of particles of varying micron sizes. At the end of the test, there is a measurement taken to determine the total percentage of ALL of these particles that were removed by the filter. That percentage is then stated as the overall filtration efficiency of the filter.

Some companies use a single pass test, others use a multiple pass test. Both are perfectly valid and will give you an excellent way of determining how well a filter will do its job, but you should not try to compare results from a single pass test to results of a multiple pass test. You'd be comparing apples and oranges. In either case, high efficiency filters will rank in the low to mid 90's for filtration efficiency. Off-the- shelf filters will rank in the mid 70's to mid 80's for filtration efficiency.

IF MICRON LEVELS ARE TO BE USED

Nevertheless, you may still want to compare filters using micron ratings. If this is the case, the following is a good rule of thumb. A filter is considered nominally efficient at a certain micron level if it can remove 50 percent of particles that size. In other words, a filter that will consistently remove 50% of particles 20 microns or larger is nominally efficient at 20 microns.

A filter is considered to achieve absolute filtration efficiency at a certain micron level if it can remove 98.7% of particles that size. So, if a filter can remove 98.7% of particles 20 microns or larger, it achieves absolute efficiency at that micron level.

Most off-the-shelf filters are based upon a cellulose fiber filtration media. Most of these filters are, at best, nominally efficient at 15 to 20 microns. They won't generally achieve absolute efficiency until particle sizes reach 30 microns or higher.

High efficiency oil filters have filtration media made of a combination of at least two of the following: glass, synthetic fibers and cellulose fibers. Those that use all three are generally the best in terms of filtration. Those that use only two will fall somewhere in between. The best of these high efficiency filters will achieve absolute efficiency down to about 10 microns and will be nominally efficient down to 5 microns or so.

HOW IMPORTANT IS BETTER EFFICIENCY?

The fact is, you would probably be amazed at how much engine wear could be eliminated simply by using more advanced oil filtration. In paper 881825 the Society of Automotive Engineers indicates that a joint study was performed between AC Spark Plug and Detroit Diesel Corp. The study found that finer oil filtration significantly reduced the rate of engine wear.

According to the paper, the tests regarding engine wear within a diesel engine were performed using four levels of oil filtration. They chose filters whose efficiency rating was very high for particles of 40 micron, 15 micron, 8.5 micron and 7 micron sizes.

The same was done for gasoline engines, except that the relative sizes were 40 microns, 30 microns, 25 microns and 15 microns.

To make a long story short, the researchers had this to say:

"Abrasive engine wear can be substantially reduced with an increase in filter single pass efficiency. Compared to a 40 micron filter, engine wear was reduced by 50 percent with 30 micron filtration. Likewise, wear was reduced by 70 percent with 15 micron filtration."

By combining this type of oil filtration with the superior protection and cleanliness of a premium synthetic oil, you will virtually eliminate engine wear.

EFFICIENCY IS NOT THE ONLY IMPORTANT FACTOR

Of course, filter capacity and quality of construction are also important considerations. If a filter has low capacity and high efficiency, it will clog up quickly. As a result, your oil will begin to bypass the filter completely and will become contaminated very quickly. Filters with high efficiency and low capacity should definitely be changed at 3,000 to 5,000 miles or 3 months - without question.

Filters which have high capacity but low efficiency will last longer without becoming saturated, but will not protect your engine as well. Of course, filters with low capacity AND low efficiency are at the bottom of the barrel and should be avoided. Generally, you can call a filter manufacturer and ask them specifically what their filtration efficiency and capacity ratings are for your filter. They should have that information.

If they give you a micron rating, ask them how efficient their filters are at removing particles of that micron size. You might also ask them at what micron level their filters are nominally efficient (50% removal) and at what level they achieve absolute efficiency (about 99% removal). If they can't or won't provide you with a straight answer, I wouldn't purchase their filters.

If they give you an overall percentage efficiency rating, ask them if that is for a single pass test or a multiple pass test. That will be important if you are to compare those ratings with other manufacturers so that you'll be comparing apples to apples.


This is nearly 10 year old info but explains the rating system pretty clearly. Again not mine. I lifted it from his site. http://www.autoeducation.com/autosho...l-change-7.htm
Ridin' Around is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.
Note: All free e-mails have been banned due to mis-use. (Yahoo, Gmail, Hotmail, etc.)
Don't have a non-free e-mail address? Click here for a solution: Manual Account Creation
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.