FreynPres

I was browsing, and came across this article. I was considering the UNI filter, but now have some reservations. I just thought I would pass it along.

Filter Test

Bret

Kyle Graham

Wow that was interesting but a little of that was hard to chew just for the reason that I have done real world testing not through a machine and yes turbo's to spool up alot faster with a intake system and egt's do lower as well these test must not have been done with a factory airbox the filter area is also increased with a conical filter. Maybe I missed it but how much psi airflow /boost pressure was this test conducted by because I have ran these aftermarket setup on naturally aspirated engines and wow what a waste of money. Just my 2 cents

AK RAM

Arlen SPICER wrote,
“Now that I am not doing the tests and my objectivity is not necessary, let me explain my motivation. The reason I started this crusade was that I was seeing people spend a lot of money on aftermarket filters based on the word of a salesperson or based on the misleading, incomplete or outright deceiving information printed on boxes and in sales literature. Gentlemen and Ladies, Marketing and the lure of profit is VERY POWERFUL! It is amazing how many people believe that better airflow = more power! Unless you have modifications out the wazoo, a more porous filter will just dirty your oil! Some will say " I have used aftermarket brand X for XXX # years with no problems. The PROBLEM is you spent a chunk of ching on a product that not only DID NOT increase your horsepower, but also let in a lot of dirt while doing it! Now how much is a lot? ANY MORE THAN NECESSARY is TOO MUCH!
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Somebody give that man a cigar!!!!……even if he does drive a Chevy. Looks like some well known filters did not fair so well. After my results with the AFE , it is not surprising at all. How about that AC Delco. Did it kick butt or what.

After hearing the results some have been able to achieve with the stock air box, I'm not sure I would even invest in another BHAF if I had to do it again.

FreynPres

That's why I have been doing a LOT of research. I keep seeing "This is the best filter" so much, without data to back up the claim. All you see is, "My fuel economy went up, and my EGT's went down". Was this vehicle driven on exactly the same roads, exactly the same way, at exactly the same temp. and humidity? It's impossible to test a system driven on the road. It has to be done in a lab using controlled environments. All I know is that from the reading that I have done.... I'm building a BHAF. I know my engine will thank me, as the silicon levels sucked. When I cleaned the filter and re-oiled it, silicon levels dropped, but so did the boost at WOT. If foam or gauze was so great, Cat and John Deer would be using them!

Bret

Shovelhead

A piece of 1/2 inch plywood sealed over the intake would also work really well to keep dirt out.

From what I could gather from the data, it looks like the AC/Delco filter might have captured the most dirt but also was the most restrictive.
(Unless I'm reading it wrong)

PourinDiesel

AFE for me

FreynPres

I'd expect a comment like that from a newbie, but not an administrator.

Bottom line..... The UNI passed 20 times more dirt than the AC, AFE passed 5 times more dirt.

Yes the AC was more restrictive.... At 385 CFM the restriction was 3.1 inches, the UNI at 385 CFM was 2.2 inches. A difference of 0.9 IN H2O. Not too shabby for filters of the same size. Take a look at what the restriction was on a USED UNI.... It was LESS than a new UNI. What does that tell you...... It sucked the oil out and became more efficient to air flow, but less efficient to dirt removal. Now put a BIG paper filter in, like the Duralite/Donaldson that has a flow rate of 680 CFM. More surface area = more CFM. If more people that ran AFE and UNI ran tests on their oil, they would be looking for a better solution too.

Bret

Shovelhead

Hmmmmmmm.......I'll have to re-read the article again.
Still not entirely convinced about running a paper filter.

I'm an administrator, never professed to be a "know it all".
I'm alway learnin' new stuff.

Just callin' it like I saw it.

Seen too many "studies" done by manufacturers or others with "a dog in the hunt" trying to make their own product look better than the competition.

Nevada

I run an aFe in the (unmodified) factory box.

My last two silicon numbers were 1 with appx. 6,000 miles on the oil. My average is in the 3 range.

My torque tube and turbo intake vanes are clean enough to eat off of.

I am currently NOT looking for a better solution.

However, these filters are wicked if not oiled properly.

Jerry R

I read this Filter Test when it was posted over at bobstheoilguy.com a few months ago and still don't know what to make of it. I use a TrueFlow Filter (oiled foam) and am very happy with it. I drive in a cloud of dust, dirt and mud when wet, just as much as I drive on the pavement. So when I saw this test I decided to have my oil analyzed. At the 15,000 mi. oil change I sent a sample to Blackstone with a comment that I was concerned about my Air Filter. Their coment back to me was: We think the Air Filter is doing its job well as evident by the low silicon levels which are lower than average. (7) I plan to retest the oil in a couple of months at 25,000 miles to verify, but its going to take more than some controlled enviroment fancy test to convience me. How about real world proof. I used a K&N in my '96 CTD for six years on the same dirt roads and it still doesn't use any oil between 5,000 mi. changes and just turned 200,000 miles. Actually the guy who bought it from me lives further down a dirt road than I do. I have discovered that my TrueFlow needs to be cleaned every 10,000 miles and when I do I look down the tube and it's clean as a whistle. Anyway, just my .02

FreynPres

Try bombing that Cummins with injectors, turbo, and a box (or two). Now that you have around 50+ pounds of boost, send your oil sample in. It won't be a pretty sight. I believe that most aftermarket filters will do a good job on a relative stock application, but once that engine really starts to breathe.......

This test was just one that had a lot of data. You can search the web and find many tests out there on air filters.



Bret

Shovelhead

We all realize we might need to make adjustments to other components as we upgrade our trucks.

If one man is getting excellent results with his current configuration, that's great.

Saying that "If you toss more variables into that equation", only confuses the issue.

If you used that AC/Delco with twins, Propane, & Nitrous it probably won't filter too well either.

Just making sure we're comparing apples to apples.

Ed

Scotty

I am not going to compare apples to apples as the filters in the test are all replacements for the Duramax. Hence, yet another variable.
So when I put the Scotty Air II on my 98 Ram running at 400 RWHP and I get a Silicate of 4-6 PPM on average and total mileage on the truck of 86,000 before I got my 2001 truck; do the test results mean this is not good? Just wondering because I felt that even though the tests where very good and accurate, for some reason the conclusional statements conveyed a different air about them then just being a test. More like a " I told you so."

Next would be my 2001 with just over 500 HP and over 80,000 miles, and again with PPM Silicate never exceeding 6 and the stock box gave me a reading of 8PPM. Does this mean I should run far away from the stocker because it read 8 PPM on a stock powered truck up to 15,000 miles [break in]?

If the aftermarket filters are so bad as I interpreted from the article, why do I not hear of catastrophic failures or law suits against the filter manufacturers? I know of several Rams with the Cummins with aftermarket intakes including mine that have well over 200,000 miles and have very good oil analysis'. I have yet to hear of one with a GOOD filter [some have been defective from the manufacturer] that have had anything higher then 7 ppm.

I think another key is to have a good system to match your needs.
I have read many test results and this one is probably the most thorough. I just think the flavor of the non technical text was somewhat skewed in how it was typed.

Scotty

MonkeyLips

I've seen professional ASTM lab testing yield far different results. Granted paper filters tend to trap most of the dirt, but were 5 to 10x more restictive. The oiled open cell foam filters flowed the best as well as stopped 100% of the super fine dust particals. Time and time again, oil charged foam yields outstanding oil analysis results. I am leary about this Testand report coming from a GM Duramax web site where the GM A/C Delco performed far better than most everything else out there. How much bias was introduced in that testing?

ed paul

i did a test,,bought a 04.5 and put a afe pro guard 7 intake system with torque tube on it to try and get better mileage, with 3 times the air flow of a stock air box and tube, u would think there would be a mileage increase,,,right? and i figuired with a mileage increase it would pay for it"s self over the life of the truck. my mileage has decreased over 1 mpg,,on the same hyw with the same cruise control, on the same tank of fuel, at night in no wind conditions.
what did i do wrong? i mean, except believe a bunch of crap!
will there be any more mileage mods in my future??????????