Oil Filters?

[Debbit]

My husband has spent a big part of the day searching for the right oil filter for our rig. I don't know why, but everywhere he went, conflicting info. Even some confusion about ATF, which he is going to drain and fill also. I've searched a lot, read a lot, only adding to the confusion. Big is good, more oil; smaller is good, oil gets there quicker. Sorry to ask, because I know oil, filters and fluids are hotly debated issues. But why is there so much confusion out there over what oil filter to use on a 22re engine in an 86 toyota pickup?

He ended up with a K&N hp4004.

The ATF is valvoline max life (dex/merc Mercon LV)

[zero]

Part of the confusion is that a Toyota oil filter also fits a Jeep, GM car and truck, Saturn, Suzuki, Yugo, and a few Harley Davidson motorcycles. When you buy an aftermarket filter it is not necessarily engineered for your Toyota.

More of the confusion is caused by the many companies selling filters and competing for best price. Also the differences in where trucks are operated. Any filter is a compromise. If it is too fine- it might plug and ruin an engine from lack of oil-pressure if there is not an emergency bypass. If there IS a bypass and it opens - it might let dirt into the engine and still ruin it. If a filter is engineered to let bigger particles through - then the engine is not protected as well. Obviously if a fine filter is used - it ought to be bigger so it can hold more trapped debris. So yes, a lot of confusion.

A 5 micron sized particle can damage an engine. A 10 micron particle has even more damage potential. Oil filters come with 10, 20, 30, 40 micron filtration, etc. I'd want a large 10 micron filter for any engine if available. If small I'd change it more often then if larger.

Filters used to be listed by mircronic efficiency. Not so much anymore. There was too much BS.

Filters for Toyota trucks come in at least three size ranges. Standard is 2.9" OD by 3.4" high. Next is 3.6": OD by 5.1"high, and then there is a two-quart version that is 3.6"OD by 7" high.

Here's a well written article in the "advertised micron problem."

Micron Ratings are arbitrary values assigned to

filters or media. Although a "micron" is a length (1

millionth of a meter), a "micron rating" is not actually

a measured value. The micron rating for a filter

quotes a particle size without establishing the filter's

efficiency at removing that size of particles. A

window screen will remove some 5 micron particles,

but it will not be very efficient. Since a micron rating

cannot be verified, filter manufacturers are safe in

assigning any number that they want. Baldwin does

not recommend comparing filters based on micron

ratings.

To compare filters, the filter industry has established

standardized tests for measuring performance.

These tests include Life and Efficiency Tests (SAE

J726, J806, and J905) and Beta Ratio Tests (SAE

J1858). These SAE standardized test methods,

along with the meticulous recording of test

conditions, ensure that filter comparisons are

"apples to apples."

Life and Efficiency Tests measure the filter's ability

to remove a standardized contaminant from a

standardized fluid that is flowing at a constant rate

and a constant temperature. The test continues until

the contamination trapped in the media raises the

differential pressure drop across the filter to a

specific, predetermined level. Life and Efficiency

Test results will include a Time Weighted Efficiency

(%) and a Capacity (grams).

Beta Ratio Tests are by far the most accurate and

objective way to compare the performance of filters.

A Beta Ratio Test measures a filter's ability to

remove particles of given sizes. In other words, the

test measures the filter's efficiencies at specific

particle sizes. The beta ratio test equipment actually

counts the particles in the fluid before the filter and

after the filter. This ratio is the Beta Ratio.

The beta ratio will generally be between 1 and 75.

Beta ratios can also be converted to efficiencies

using the following formula:

In summary, equipment owners should consider

several factors when choosing filters for their

applications. For best results, customers should

consult the latest edition of the Baldwin Applications

Book and Cross-Reference Product Guide and

select filters based on Original Equipment

Manufacturer (OEM) part numbers. When

comparing filters, the questionable nature of micron

ratings encourages users to try to obtain

standardized test information for apples-to-apples

product comparisons.

[zero]

By the way - from the tests I've read up on - the K&N tests the same overall efficiency as NAPA Gold (made by WIX) and many other brands, Most of the premium oil filters I read specs on surpass the OEM Toyota filters (the ones made in the USA and the ones from Denso). Many of the Toyota filters tested at 60% efficiency @ 20 microns whereas the aftermarket filters from K&N, Napa, Amsoil, Mobil 1, Ford, etc. all tested in the high 90s. That does not make an OEM Toyota filter "bad." I guess it means they care more about free-flow then catching all the particles. Or - maybe they are just cheap and making all the bucks they can?

[Debbit]

Thank you for the info! No wonder he wasn't sure which one to buy. :-0

[MontanaChinook]

I've always gone Napa Gold. I've heard a lot of Fram horror stories so I stay away from those. But they're just stories I read on the internet so take them for what they are...

[Skydancer2992]

When I had a 22RE, I noticed a big difference between filters with an anti-drainback valve (Toyota, NAPA, Walmart) and ones without (FRAM).

If I used a FRAM, the oil light would stay on longer at startup. Also, the engine would sound like it was running rougher.

I quit using FRAM.

[WME]

Some thoughts'

Amsoil published a lot of tests about their filters, the Amsoil "always won" but Mobile 1 and Hastings finished 2nd or 3rd depending on the test. Amsoil now sells Hastings as a cost saver filter.

If you do a lot of start and stop type driving the then a high quality stock sized filter is your choice. If you spend more time driving then a larger one (middle sized) is the ticket as the larger size lets the oil flow through filter medium slower. Plus there is a small cooling effect due to the larger housing.

[linda s]

Thanks Skydancer I was trying to think of what that anti-drainback valve was called. Toyota has it and K+ N doesn't. I spent the big bucks for K+N for a while but my oil looked dirty faster than any other brand. Don't know why but I change mine pretty often and I really saw a difference.

Linda S

[Maineah]

The last Tacoma I had was a 97 2.7 it had 285K miles on it when I sold it I changed the oil on a regular basis (what ever was on sale at WalMart ) and used the orange can of doom (Fram filter) I guess they are not that bad.

[Skydancer2992]

Maineah, I only noticed the overly long oil light with the 22RE and FRAM. With the V-6 engines in my camper and 4Runner, I've not had that issue. So I occasionally use a FRAM or whatever I find on sale.

[zero]

Fram makes a lot of different oil filters for same engines. I assume they have some differences. For a 22RE Fram sells - XG3614, TG3614, HM3614, PH3614 (OEM style), PH7575, PH8A (oversize), etc.

Different model filters on different engines with different states of wear, or with different oil, or in different climates are bound to have varying outcomes.

I'll also note that there are many engines that last surprisingly long times that have no oil filters at all.