RE: More on filter media

[Paul_Royal@isserv9.idx.com]

So far, I said:

I'm curious as to whether we have any folks out there that know > about the
quality of the media as opposed to the quantity of media.  I'm
> guessing that you could filter oil with an oil filter filled with sand,
> coffee filters, old shop towels, marbles, or a really splendid media that

Then Bob D'Amato said:

>There may be some filters better than others as far as filtration goes...
Thickness of media isnt the >real concern, but filter capabilities is. I
would rather have a low end purolator who uses one layer of >filter paper
than some off brand that may use 4 inches of filter media.
>Id rather have one layer of filter paper than 12 inches of chicken wire!!

>I use oem or Mahle filters, mostly because of the drainback valve, not
>for its filter capabilities, even though they MAY be better...

>I would suspect that most of the better known filters on the marke will
FILTER about the same.

I come back and say:

When I refer to media...I include paper in my definition of media.  I use
the OEM or Mahles too because of the drainback valve like yourself.
My real concern is that the CR report (only one I've ever seen) said that
the FRAM media was markedly better than other brands.  The question now I
guess is at what point filtration capabilities are really the same.  For
example:  If FRAM media filters down to 5 microns and the Mahle only down
to 10 (made up figures) does that make a heck of a lot of difference?  IE:
What is better, a 50% reduction in size of what gets through the media or a
drainback valve.  Damn, does anyone have that old report?
That's it.....I'm gonna use that chicken wire filter from Schwabovia!...It
takes up a lot of space...but what the hell.

Paul "PITA" Royal........losing my hair, but not my sense of humor.