Have you cut one open and actually looked at the construction? I have and believe me, it was enough to drop the thought of ever using a fram filter again! Check the nice seal the anti-drainback valve gets against a nice piece of oil soaked cardboard instead of a clean metal surface.

Do a search on this board, and I guarentee you will find a ton of people who have complained about drivetrain clatter. A fram filter is nearly always the cause.

Given the fact that a FL-280s motorcraft filter can be had at Wal-Mart for 2.97, and the cheapest Fram is about 3.50 or so, I'd much rather have the filter with metal construction inside instead of cardboard! In fact, I still have not heard of one other manufactuer who uses cardboard in their filters.

My gut feel is with 3,000 mile oil changes, the Fram probably holds up. Fram themselves seems to admit as much when they market a filter called the X2 that is designed for longer service intervals - up to 7500 miles. It is the only fram with metal end caps, but it costs $10 or more.

 

Just my own experience, and the fact that Fram is a top seller of filters; if failure rates on Fram are as bad as some propose they wouldn't be in that position year after year.
You’re saying that a filter is inferior until proven good? Well in that case there all crap. Again the only way to judge is with empirical scientific data, and like I said I haven't seen any with Fram or any of the other filters for that matter.

 

McDonalds is probably the top seller of hamburgers, does that mean they are the best or even a good product?

I don't have any scientific data to back it up, but if looking at the insides of a Fram and then looking at the insides of a filter that costs the same or less from almost any other manufacturer doesn't make you swear off Frams, something is seriously wrong.

Fram can get away with their crappy construction simply beacuse of people who don't take the time to learn any better. Just because they've always worked in the past doesn't mean there isn't a better value out there. Believe me, there are way better values out there!

 

Is that why I pay over $10 for my current full flow filter???

 

Your opinion that McDonalds hamburgers are not a good product doesn't make them an inferior product.

Again, I'd like to see more scientific facts and less opinion.

 

I've already gotten my scientific proof just cutting one open an comparing to ANY other brand. Have you done this?

 

If you want to see how leaky the Fram's antidrainback valve is..........1)find a bolt that fits the threads 2)Fill up the filter with oil 3) put some teflon tape on the bolt to seal it...... then screw it in. You will see just how lousy the Fram filter is. In overhead cam engines this valve is crucial to prevent oil starvation on startup.

 

Again, this is not scientific proof! Just because a filter uses different material or production methods does not indicate that the filter is inferior. One is drawing conclusions based on ones opinion that material "A" is better than material "B" for this particular application.
I guess this explains the rash of OHC engine failures that we've been hearing about. Wait a minute there is no rash of OHC engine failures and many of them have Fram filters. I don't know how Fram could stay in business if the product they offered harmed OHC engines.

 

Fram stays in business through advertising and the public's lack of knowledge.

 

So the fact that I have looked counts for nothing huh? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together and see what you money is buying in these cases.

You keep accusing people of not using scientific information to prove Frams are bad. I haven't seen you post any scientific information to show they are good either. The only thing you have offered is your opinions, which is the same as others have done, which is not good enough for you, but apparently is OK in your case.

I don't own a fancy scientific lab. I am not a specialist in lubricants or filtering media. I am, however, a person with two eyes and a brain. The facts are these:

1. Fram is the ONLY brand to use cardboard end caps in their filters. I have not seen one other brand that isn't a rebadged fram that uses cardboard in them. Even Fram uses metal end caps in their premium product, the X2, which according to Fram istelf, is to offer the protection you need to run an extended change interval of 7500 miles. If that isn't a staement of the durabilty of the cardboard, I do not know what is.

2. The Fram filters have the least filtering material in them of almost all of the filters. While not a true scientific test, logic would tell you that when ALL of the other filters out there, including the one specified by the manufacturer, have more filtering media in them, it isn't going to filter as well and will clog up quicker.

3. A fram filter's media I cut open wasn't secured properly to one of the endcaps, allowing a path of flow around the filtering media, bypassing the function for what a filter is intended. While not scientific, a visible hole certainly doesn't offer good filtering, IMHO.

4. The cardboard end cap was also bent, which meant the anti-drain back valve could not seal properly to prevent backflow. This allows unfiltered oil to drain out of the galleries in the engine and lessens protection ofered to the engine at startup. This is a documented problem here on the board. Again, not scientific, but logic would say that clattering at startup is bad, and if a different filter gets rid of it, then the Fram filter is the cause of the problem.

Again, none of that is scientific, as you define it, but simple logic makes another statement.

I'm not saying other filters don't have problems. The supertech filter had some metal shavings and burrs on the threads, which I wouldn't be happy to put in my truck. A few had lightly discolored end caps.

My point here is simply this: If you are going to spend 3 or 4 dollars on a filter, which filter would you buy? The Fram, you haven't had a problem with them before (which is exactly what Fram hopes you keep thinking), or buy another filter without all of the issues above for the exact same price. Its your money - just remember the money saved by Fram cutting corners is money out of your pocket into the proft for them.

And last: My Opinion: Frams probably work as well as they need to if you keep running 3,000 mile oil changes. Beyond that, no way in heck will I ever put another one on a vehicle of mine if I can help it.

 

I too don't care for Fram filters for all of the reasons discussed above, but I'd tend to agree a Fram filter probably wont destroy your engine. However, I personally wouldn't want to drive around using a filter constantly wondering if the bypass was open and the filter was just a nice orange decoration on the side of the motor.

What does a filter do? ... remove fine contaminants from the oil that would cause wear. Would higher wear cause engine failure? .... my uneducated opinion is that it would probably just produce an engine that is noisier and an oil burner with less power (compression) at a younger age, but not kill the engine.

True... the only way to tell is with scientific testing, but for my $3.50 non-fram filter (with metal spring clip), I'm also buying piece-of-mind. If it is actually overbuilt, then so be it.

I think of it as the age-old dino vs. syn debate... will dino oil kill your engine? Of course not. Does synthetic offer advantages? Yes. Will I ever place my engine in a situation where I would benefit from syn? Probably never know... but I'm buying piece-of-mind, and that's reason enough for me.

A visual inspection will not tell the whole story on which filter is best, but I always feel more comfortable with products that have beter craftmanship. If a company goes to the trouble to put the 'craftmanship' inside the filter casing where the average person would never look, then there has got to be a reason for it.

 

If you do a search of threads, you should find at least one that references a website that has scientific data pertaining to most major oil filters. I have seen it on several threads in the past.

If I recall, the scientific data recommended a Purolator Pure-One as the best all around oil filter. It also showed that base Frams were junk.

 

Not to further beat a dead cow, I was perusing Chilton's and noticed that they seem to bolster the assumption that our engines are recommended at 5w-30 weight oil. However, also in bold print were the words," Ford recommends that SAE 5W-30 viscocity engine oil should be used for all climate conditions, however, SAE 10W-30 is acceptable for vehicles operating in moderate-to-hot conditions." I guess the only difference between the two oils is the cold start up flowablility.


Damn, we just keep kicken it in the head!

Good day to all!

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cosmo
Again, this is not scientific proof! Just because a filter uses different material or production methods does not indicate that the filter is inferior. One is drawing conclusions based on ones opinion that material "A" is better than material "B" for this particular application.

Yo Cosmo,

I've searched the 'net and haven't found any scientific studies that prove Cotton fiber brake shoes are inferior.

I haven't seen or heard a "rash" of stories about these cotton fiber brake shoes (made from recycled Fruit of the Looms and Elmo's glue) causing any accidents.

Since there is no scientific proof that material A (asbestos,ceramic etc.) is better than material B (soiled undies and glue). I guess you wouldn't mind driving your wife and kids around with this new product from the" flimFram" corporation. [B][B][B]