When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I always grab a couple oil filters to get my Summit orders up to $100, so I have a cupboard full of XP’s.
Too bad that post didn’t get more responses.
Funny, many years ago the Fram was at the bottom of the heap.
I’d be curious what most here use
I put an XP on the Chevelle this go around because it’s a good bit longer than the standard 57060 Wix I always run, yet is the perfect length for my low Chevelle. The XP doesn’t have the filtering ability that the standard Wix does, (by a hair) but it flows better (by a hair). First XP I’ve ever used this go around. Like you, I use filters to get my orders up to free shipping status so I have several Wix air and oil filters in the cabinet for most of my vehicles around here.
Wix was acquired by Mann+Hummel a couple years ago, the same company that ran Purolator into the ground. Production is being shifted to Mexico and South Korea, and quality control is lacking. In ISO 4548-12 filtration testing, they're coming out well below their advertised filtration rating. One of them also exhibited a bypass failure in a recent bubble point test.
I posted some data on a bunch of filters on here earlier this year.
More heat is generated from the bearings than is transferred from anywhere else, even the piston/ring area. Piston squirters may take exception to that, hard to really say. As a note, only ~3% of combustion heat makes it to the oil. Typical temp rise through the bearings is 30-50*F over sump temp depending on rpm and load so I'd expect ~220*F bearing temps on the highway. Some racing engines can see up to 75*F temp rise such as NASCAR cup engines with ~280*F sump temps and ~355*F bearing temps. (...and a 0W-16 oil)
Common steel valve springs can run as high as 450*F before they begin to fatigue. Of course, you don't want them to get that hot, and a street engine with a hydraulic cam and even spirited driving won't get them anywhere remotely close to that temperature. It's not really an issue to be concerned about other than just ensuring they're getting oil flow to them. Valve spring temp is more of a concern with solid roller applications with high spring rates and high lift running at high rpm such as NASCAR, F1, Pro Stock, etc... It's common for them to use oil squirters in the heads just for cooling the valve springs.
Small amounts (<2%) of water can be present without making the oil appear milky. If there is some trace amounts there, it's obviously not causing any harm. I don't think I saw it posted (if it was, forgive me) but what oil are you using?
Mobil 1 0w40. I was trying to say that a HV pump is probably a good thing when you have an external cooler and oil squirters. Squirters do bleed off oil pressure, and to a certain extent, volume available elsewhere. Also trying to imply that valve springs need oil for cooling. It may not benefit them much, if any, to get a bit more oil. I realize a HV pump with stock pressure won't get any more oil to them. HV with the HP relief spring would, though how much more is an unknown. I'm running PAC 1905 dual springs, been installed for almost 31,000 miles, and seem fine, no float to 7,000rpm. Also want to convey to those who don't know: The LS7 doesn't have OEM piston squirters, which I've been told would interfere with the longer 4" stroke. I had them added to my block by Thomson Automotive. $300 extra, but I wanted them in case of severe duty. They had a CNC program that drilled and tapped into the oil galleys, and then they screwed in Holley carb main jets, what size, idk.......
Good info on Wix. Sad to hear. For those to young to remember, Purolator used to be one of the best filters out there. Hardly see them anymore. Sad what greed and incompetence can do to a company......
I put an XP on the Chevelle this go around because it’s a good bit longer than the standard 57060 Wix I always run, yet is the perfect length for my low Chevelle. The XP doesn’t have the filtering ability that the standard Wix does, (by a hair) but it flows better (by a hair). First XP I’ve ever used this go around. Like you, I use filters to get my orders up to free shipping status so I have several Wix air and oil filters in the cabinet for most of my vehicles around here.
Oil flow is the main parameter we're after. Pressure gives an idea of the flow, but not directly correlative because of other factors. I don't hardly look at oil pressure much except to ensure limits. So long as there's 5-6 gpm flow at WOT, I send it.
.
Poly, how are you measuring oil flow volume? Do you adjust oil weight to meet desired flow spec at ~65psi?
Mobil 1 0w40. I was trying to say that a HV pump is probably a good thing when you have an external cooler and oil squirters. Squirters do bleed off oil pressure, and to a certain extent, volume available elsewhere. Also trying to imply that valve springs need oil for cooling. It may not benefit them much, if any, to get a bit more oil. I realize a HV pump with stock pressure won't get any more oil to them. HV with the HP relief spring would, though how much more is an unknown. I'm running PAC 1905 dual springs, been installed for almost 31,000 miles, and seem fine, no float to 7,000rpm. Also want to convey to those who don't know: The LS7 doesn't have OEM piston squirters, which I've been told would interfere with the longer 4" stroke. I had them added to my block by Thomson Automotive. $300 extra, but I wanted them in case of severe duty. They had a CNC program that drilled and tapped into the oil galleys, and then they screwed in Holley carb main jets, what size, idk.......
M1 FS 0W-40 is a decent oil though not very shear stable. It's common for it to be a 30 grade within a few hundred miles, not that that's a problem.
Higher oil volume and pressure isn't likely to harm anything in all reality. If it gives you peace of mind, then go for it.
Originally Posted by grinder11
Good info on Wix. Sad to hear. For those to young to remember, Purolator used to be one of the best filters out there. Hardly see them anymore. Sad what greed and incompetence can do to a company......
Purolator was the industry standard until about 2013 when Mann+Hummel stepped in. Their filter materials were cheapened extensively which coincided with a massive surge in media tearing and anti-drainback valve issues. I guess one could say it wasn't Purolator's fault as much as it was their parent company selling them down the river. That's what happened to Fram in 1999 when Honeywell / Allied acquired Fram and Autolite, promptly closing down their US plants and sending that production to Mexico. That's when their dark era started. Rank acquired Fram in 2011 and production came back to the US with a massive R&D budget boost. The result is much better filters today than 10 years ago. Here's an article from 2015 on their Ohio plant expansion and production.
A lot of people are loyal to one particular brand, but brand loyalty can be blinding. Fram has been owned by 4 different companies over the last 30 years with each one having their own influence. Their base model filter has undergone 7 design changes in that same timeframe. None of this is a secret. It's all open information that can be found in just seconds with a google search, yet I'd bet more than 95% of car enthusiasts have no idea. A little research on a product before buying goes a long way, especially in filtration where the standard is constantly changing.
Originally Posted by 01CamaroSSTx
I run K&N oil filters anyway so is there anything bad to report on them?
Durable, excellent flow, but poor filtration. They're good for racing applications that favor the flow over filtration or anything that lives for short durations but high intensity. They are okay for street use, certainly aren't harmful, but not really ideal from a filtration perspective. I haven't had any quality control issues from them.
Originally Posted by tblentrprz
Poly, how are you measuring oil flow volume? Do you adjust oil weight to meet desired flow spec at ~65psi?
I often use remote oil filter mounts with a flowmeter on the return line after the filter.
The ideal oil viscosity is determined by the operating oil temperature, rod and main bearing clearances, and the load on those bearings. It's a balancing act of sufficient flow to reduce heat generation and hydrodynamic friction but not so low as to cause a loss of full fluid lubrication. There's been enough studies into this to somewhat easily calculate it from the journal speed, length, diameter, and clearance. Since oil pumps are positive displacement, measuring the flow rate gives you a good idea of where you're at.
Pressure can give you a ballpark idea, but it's too much of a variable to get exact flow because of outside factors. For example, an engine with a lot of blow-by and poor ventilation (ie: breathers) can see high air pressure (relative to ambient pressure) inside the crankcase. That air pressure is also resisting the oil exiting its orifices. You could see a rise in oil pressure with a rise in crankcase pressure, but because oil pumps are positive displacement, the flow will remain relatively constant. The pressure has to increase for the flow to stay the same which means the pump is working harder (robbing power) to overcome the resistance. In the other direction, engines running crankcase vacuum will see less oil pressure due to less crankcase pressure resisting the flow, but again, flow remains relatively constant. It's a matter of relevance of the oil pressure to crankcase pressure and ambient pressure which all is accounted for when determining the ideal viscosity. There's other factors like the engine's stroke which determines the centrifugal force acting on the oil trying to flow to the rod journals, the pumping of hydraulic lifters, oil transport around the pistons/rings, and actuation of variable engine components like VVT. However, these are secondary factors that should be designed to work with the viscosity determined by the rod and main bearings, not the other way around. Oil squirters throw yet another wrench into the mess.
M1 FS 0W-40 is a decent oil though not very shear stable. It's common for it to be a 30 grade within a few hundred miles, not that that's a problem.
Higher oil volume and pressure isn't likely to harm anything in all reality. If it gives you peace of mind, then go for it.
Purolator was the industry standard until about 2013 when Mann+Hummel stepped in. Their filter materials were cheapened extensively which coincided with a massive surge in media tearing and anti-drainback valve issues. I guess one could say it wasn't Purolator's fault as much as it was their parent company selling them down the river. That's what happened to Fram in 1999 when Honeywell / Allied acquired Fram and Autolite, promptly closing down their US plants and sending that production to Mexico. That's when their dark era started. Rank acquired Fram in 2011 and production came back to the US with a massive R&D budget boost. The result is much better filters today than 10 years ago. Here's an article from 2015 on their Ohio plant expansion and production.
A lot of people are loyal to one particular brand, but brand loyalty can be blinding. Fram has been owned by 4 different companies over the last 30 years with each one having their own influence. Their base model filter has undergone 7 design changes in that same timeframe. None of this is a secret. It's all open information that can be found in just seconds with a google search, yet I'd bet more than 95% of car enthusiasts have no idea. A little research on a product before buying goes a long way, especially in filtration where the standard is constantly changing.
Durable, excellent flow, but poor filtration. They're good for racing applications that favor the flow over filtration or anything that lives for short durations but high intensity. They are okay for street use, certainly aren't harmful, but not really ideal from a filtration perspective. I haven't had any quality control issues from them.
I often use remote oil filter mounts with a flowmeter on the return line after the filter.
The ideal oil viscosity is determined by the operating oil temperature, rod and main bearing clearances, and the load on those bearings. It's a balancing act of sufficient flow to reduce heat generation and hydrodynamic friction but not so low as to cause a loss of full fluid lubrication. There's been enough studies into this to somewhat easily calculate it from the journal speed, length, diameter, and clearance. Since oil pumps are positive displacement, measuring the flow rate gives you a good idea of where you're at.
Pressure can give you a ballpark idea, but it's too much of a variable to get exact flow because of outside factors. For example, an engine with a lot of blow-by and poor ventilation (ie: breathers) can see high air pressure (relative to ambient pressure) inside the crankcase. That air pressure is also resisting the oil exiting its orifices. You could see a rise in oil pressure with a rise in crankcase pressure, but because oil pumps are positive displacement, the flow will remain relatively constant. The pressure has to increase for the flow to stay the same which means the pump is working harder (robbing power) to overcome the resistance. In the other direction, engines running crankcase vacuum will see less oil pressure due to less crankcase pressure resisting the flow, but again, flow remains relatively constant. It's a matter of relevance of the oil pressure to crankcase pressure and ambient pressure which all is accounted for when determining the ideal viscosity. There's other factors like the engine's stroke which determines the centrifugal force acting on the oil trying to flow to the rod journals, the pumping of hydraulic lifters, oil transport around the pistons/rings, and actuation of variable engine components like VVT. However, these are secondary factors that should be designed to work with the viscosity determined by the rod and main bearings, not the other way around. Oil squirters throw yet another wrench into the mess.
I agree with you. Most, if not all, oils lose some viscosity within 300-500 miles. Especially in motorcycle engines, because most have the engine sharing oil with the gearbox, and the gears chop up the oil. I've been running Mobil1 0w-40 since before it was available in the 5qt containers. Never any problems. My thinking is it has pretty much the same cold flow numbers as the 5w-30, with better high temp viscosity and protection......
I ended up getting this large cooler and its fitted with a 1800cfm fan on the underside. Stayed with the factory oil pump and a 180 degree oil thermostat. The next step is to install a air scoop on the decklid. I can now windup this thing all I want and have no oil temp issues. The way its setup the cooler doesn't cool at all until the fan comes on. This way my oil temp can be maintained not to cold or to hot. I am now going to work on another intake / cold air system. I would like to be able to use a carb style intake and run the air filter to one of the side scoops.
"Volume", when speaking of an oil pump, has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the "volume" of the sump, oil cooler, or ANYTHING ELSE.
An oil pump is a CONSTANT VOLUME device. Each rotation moves a certain amount of oil. It is designed in such a way that once the oil gets into it, it has no way to go, other than out the discharge. Unlike some other types of pumps, the "volume" that it delivers, DOES NOT CHANGE due to restriction.
The pump contains a "bypass" valve that is spring loaded, to allow the constant volume of oil moved by the pump gears, to return to the sump, once some pressure limit is reached. This prevents things from happening like, exploding oil filters, "hydraulic-ing" the pump, and so on, when the downstream restrictions (bearing clearances, and nothing else, ideally) are such that more oil is being delivered by the pump gears than can be forced through them, without excessive pressure developing.
The ONLY reason that there is ANY pressure AT ALL is because of whatever restrictions exist downstream of it. In the absence of the "bypass" inside the pump, the pressure will always rise to a value such that the flow through those restrictions is equal to the "volume" of the pump. If it takes 100, or 150, or 200 psi to force that much oil through the bearings, then that's what the pressure will rise to. If the pump can deliver more "volume" than can flow through the restrictions (bearings) at a safe pressure level, let's say 70 psi or whatever,, the bypass will open, thus allowing the "extra" pump delivery to escape back to the sump.
Coolers, filters, long lines, etc. are additional restrictions to oil flow. Maybe not all that much, but restrictions nonetheless. They require pressure to move the oil through them, or in another choice of words, create a pressure drop. So if your pump's bypass regulator is set to, say 50 psi, and the sum of all that stuff that's between the pump and the engine produce, say, 10 psi of pressure drop, your 50 psi pump will ACTUALLY only be delivering 40 psi to the bearings.
For this reason, the addition of coolers etc. requires higher PRESSURE to be supplied AT THE PUMP, so that after the pressure drop that those things create has occurred, there is still the desired pressure AT THE ENGINE to keep the flow through the bearings at an adequate level.
The pump can be thought of as "doing work", like any other pump; the amount of work it can do is characterized by its pressure vs volume curve. Pressure × volume = work.
Therefore, when adding coolers lines filters etc., the pump's regulator setting needs to be at a higher PRESSURE than it would otherwise. The pump VOLUME requirements are determined by the degree of restriction presented by the BEARINGS, and nothing else, same as without the cooler etc.
The pump MIGHT however, have to have a higher VOLUME capacity to be able to deliver the higher PRESSURE needed to overcome the added restriction of the cooler etc., at whatever FLOW RATE (volume) the bearings require to remain properly lubed and cooled, than it would if that extra "work" requirement wasn't there. Probably won't be by much but it doesn't hurt to provide for it.
I agree, the 10296 is a good all-around choice for most of these motors that don't have VVT etc., which require flow OTHER THAN that to the bearings. Its regulator has a stiffer spring and therefore it can deliver the higher pressure needed to overcome the restriction of coolers and such things, and may need some extra volume capacity to be able to do the extra work of forcing the oil through those other things.
I've tried to say the same thing, but you said it better!! Pressure is a function of bearing clearances, piston squirters, length of oil cooler lines, etc. It's my understanding that pressure is pressure. If you have 2 oil pumps, let's say for example, an OEM pump, and a Melling SPHV, and the relief valves of both are set to open at the same pressure, if you would install first one, then the other, on the exact same OEM engine, the Standard pressure, Hi Volume, would flow no more oil than the factory pump.....IF on the same OEM engine. Now, on a different engine with opened bearing clearances, with larger side clearances, the OEM pump pressure would drop. The Hi Volume pump would now keep the pressure up at the stock clearance level. Hope this makes sense.......
10-15-2021, 05:50 AM
