UFI oil filter paranoia

[dlaing]

Is that correct? K&N mediocre? Crap, I have been using the HP-1002 on my truck for 5 years! If you have a link to the research I would appreciate it.

 

Also, I did not know that the HP-1002 would work on my V11 Sport. Is that really correct? If so it would be nice to use the same filters on both.

I don't know, just cause I read it on the internet does not make it true...

 

from http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Filters.html#OilFilters

"I received an email from Suzuki of Victoria, informing me that a Hayabusa they took in for service showed no oil pressure. They found the cause was an aged anti-drainback valve on a Hi-Flo filter that would not open, thus cutting off all oil pressure to the entire engine. K&N filters are made by Hi-Flo, so these filters are also suspect."

and

 

http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/FilterStudy.html

"Made by Hi Flo. Average filter with a $6 nut welded onto the end cap. "

 

Not sure about the HP-1002, but I show the K&N KN-163 to be the fit for our bikes.

http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=KN-163

[polebridge]

I don't know, just cause I read it on the internet does not make it true...

 

from http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Filters.html#OilFilters

"I received an email from Suzuki of Victoria, informing me that a Hayabusa they took in for service showed no oil pressure. They found the cause was an aged anti-drainback valve on a Hi-Flo filter that would not open, thus cutting off all oil pressure to the entire engine. K&N filters are made by Hi-Flo, so these filters are also suspect."

and

 

http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/FilterStudy.html

"Made by Hi Flo. Average filter with a $6 nut welded onto the end cap. "

 

Not sure about the HP-1002, but I show the K&N KN-163 to be the fit for our bikes.

http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=KN-163

 

Excellent info! Thanks Dlaing.

[quazi-moto]

Looks like the Purolator Pure One is the winner based on those comparisons. It also looks like the gasket material is different from the rest. Its also interesting to note that the anti-drainback valve isn't really required in a vertically mounted filter.

[quazi-moto]

Been doin' a little homework with regard to motorcycle specific oil filters and here's what I've come up with so far:

 

1) Purolator : ML16822 (Note: This is not a Pure-One filter)

2) Wix : 51215 (Direct replacement according to Wix website)

3) Hastings : LF576

 

 

FWIW: The Wix filter fits a lot of Harleys as well and is available in a Napa version (P/N: 1215).

The Purolator PL10241 (non-M/C specific) Pure-One filter has a PTFE treated silicon gasket for "easy removal" so I don't know if that's really what I want on the Guzzi. I didn't find much info on the Hastings filter. I'm going to try the K&N HP-1002 (non-M/C specific) for now, it has a stout canister and I like the little nut spot welded on the bottom.

[quazi-moto]

After a little more investigating it appears that the Wix 51215 filter has no anti-drainback valve. I'm not sure if it matters in a vertically mounted application, but for peace of mind the Wix 51348 might be a better choice. Same goes for Napa.

[polebridge]

I have always used the K&N filters on my truck and my Jeep. I have always tightened them by hand only and they have never come loose or leaked. I wonder just how much torque I am getting on them by hand?

 

Next time I change my oil on my truck I'll see if I can slip my torque wrench in there and figure it out. I'll let you know how it goes.

[Guest ratchethack]

IMHO, as I've observed many times , due to changes in stiction imparted by the gasket from heat and pressure cycles and possibly mild chemical interaction with the oil itself, the torque you get taking it off may be significantly higher than the torque it took to get it on.

 

BAA, TJM & YMMV

[polebridge]

IMHO, as I've observed many times , due to changes in stiction imparted by the gasket from heat and pressure cycles and possibly mild chemical interaction with the oil itself, the torque you get taking it off may be significantly higher than the torque it took to get it on.

 

BAA, TJM & YMMV

 

Agreed. I should have been clearer. I intend to try to use the torque wrench to calculate the amount of tightening torque I get by hand the next time I do an oil change.

[Guest ratchethack]

 

Just checkin'. . . .

[Guest Nigelstephens]

I have just done mine 2 weeks ago. But I intend to do the same. That is measure the torque even though I rarely use a torque wrench. They do have their uses...ocassionally.

[Ryland3210]

It appears that all I've read about oil filters backing off is always in reference to the UFI oil filter. When I did my most recent oil change I used a UFI because I had a few already on hand in the garage. After reading all the horror stories I'm beginning to wish that I had used a different brand of filter. I dropped the sump when I did the oil change and removing the old filter (dealer installed UFI) took some leverage with the filter wrench. I installed the new one after filling it with oil and oiling the gasket. I tightened it the best I could by hand and no more. Should I just keep an eye on the oil pressure idiot light or what? Amsoil 20w50 synthetic ain't exactly cheap so I don't feel like dumping it right away if I can avoid it. In the future I'll probably run the K&N HP-1002 filter.

 

 

As Ratchethack points out emphatically, there has been no long term statistical study to prove one filter loosens any more often than another.

 

However, laws of physics are fairly reliable tools for analysis and prediction. In addition to comparing sealing performance, my study did disclose that the Purolator filters permit more tightening turns and more squeeze of the gasket than the UFI, and therefore permitted the gasket to act like a longer compression spring. Longer springs will decrease force less for each increment of relaxation, and that indicates there is less likelihood of loosening. However, as I've said before, that does not mean UFI filters will always loosen if tightened enough.

 

See the FAQ for details

 

If you want a redundant approach, other threads have suggested hose clamps on the filter. There have also been concerns about the clamp coming loose.

NAPA offers a variety of clamps, some of which are spring or Belleville washer loaded to maintain clamping force for critical applications. This type should stay on the filter can reliably if that's an approach you wish to take.

[Ryland3210]

Been doin' a little homework with regard to motorcycle specific oil filters and here's what I've come up with so far:

 

1) Purolator : ML16822 (Note: This is not a Pure-One filter)

2) Wix : 51215 (Direct replacement according to Wix website)

3) Hastings : LF576

FWIW: The Wix filter fits a lot of Harleys as well and is available in a Napa version (P/N: 1215).

The Purolator PL10241 (non-M/C specific) Pure-One filter has a PTFE treated silicon gasket for "easy removal" so I don't know if that's really what I want on the Guzzi. I didn't find much info on the Hastings filter. I'm going to try the K&N HP-1002 (non-M/C specific) for now, it has a stout canister and I like the little nut spot welded on the bottom.

 

The Purolator L10241 Premium Plus (not PL10241) is listed as a cross for the Guzzi, $3.18 at Auto Zone.

I would steer clear of the PL version with the PTFE treated gasket. The ML16822 is listed by Purolator for the Guzzi at about $13. There is no significant difference in specs according to Purolator's website.

 

I don't recall where, but I had asked about the need for an anti-drainback valve for a vertical application elsewhere on the forum, and was convinced by the answer it was good to have, for what that's worth.

[Guest ratchethack]

I don't recall where, but I had asked about the need for an anti-drainback valve for a vertical application elsewhere on the forum, and was convinced by the answer it was good to have, for what that's worth.

John, as I recall, I'd responded to an inquiry you had on the orientation of the filter WRT function of the anti-drainback valve. I reckon I'd better note that I have neither any evidence, any proof, nor any indicators of any kind to back this up, it's merely a logical presupposition.

 

Seems to me that considering the function of the anti-drainback valve being one of preventing backflow of oil through the filter after shutoff of the motor, without the ADV, the small pressure of oil in the galleries up to the cam and heads could gravity-feed backwards through the filter, washing captured bad stuff on the bad side of the filter media back through the PRV assembly and into the sump.

 

Since treatment of captured murderous enemy combatants had been in the news lately, I'd made the analogy that best not free them once they've been captured -- hence the significance of the ADV.

 

It seemed reasonable to me that in this scenario, the orientation of the filter would be irrelevant to the function of the anti-drainback valve.

 

BAA, TJM, & YM could possibly V, in part or in its entirety.

[Ryland3210]

John, as I recall, I'd responded to an inquiry you had on the orientation of the filter WRT function of the anti-drainback valve. I reckon I'd better note that I have neither any evidence, any proof, nor any indicators of any kind to back this up, it's merely a logical presupposition.

 

Seems to me that considering the function of the anti-drainback valve being one of preventing backflow of oil through the filter after shutoff of the motor, without the ADV, the small pressure of oil in the galleries up to the cam and heads could gravity-feed backwards through the filter, washing captured bad stuff on the bad side of the filter media back through the PRV assembly and into the sump.

 

Since treatment of captured murderous enemy combatants had been in the news lately, I'd made the analogy that best not free them once they've been captured -- hence the significance of the ADV.

 

It seemed reasonable to me that in this scenario, the orientation of the filter would be irrelevant to the function of the anti-drainback valve.

 

BAA, TJM, & YM could possibly V, in part or in its entirety.

 

 

The stationary pump could pass some through its working clearances, I suppose. If there is any pocket for air to get trapped in the oil distribution system, that could have the effect of acting like an accumulator, and provide pressure for a short time after the pump stopped. Perhaps this could force some oil backwards. It is likely the pressure would very quickly drop below the relief valve cracking pressure, so not much, if any, would escape that way. I suppose some could work its way past the working clearances of the pump.

 

In high pressure hydraulic systems, reverse flow can be very damaging to filter elements. Similar to the automotive oil filters, the oil comes into the outside of the element and flows out from the inside. Some filters we use can withstand 3000 psi on the inlet and zero on the outlet without collapsing, if they become totally clogged. However, reverse pressure can blow up the pleated element like a balloon if high enough. To prevent this, we add check valves at the inlet of the filter, and sometimes outlet as well, depending on the application, which often include large accumulators downstream of the filter.

 

On balance, an anti-drainback (i.e. check) valve in this application may not be necessary, but is cheap insurance, in my opinion.

[FuelCooler]

 

If you want a redundant approach, other threads have suggested hose clamps on the filter. There have also been concerns about the clamp coming loose.

NAPA offers a variety of clamps, some of which are spring or Belleville washer loaded to maintain clamping force for critical applications. This type should stay on the filter can reliably if that's an approach you wish to take.

 

My UNI filter gets tightened by a strap type filter wench, by feel. It is still tight (checked with the strap wrench) but I put an 'Ideal' brand hose clamp on it anyway. If the truely paranoid among us are worried about the hose clamp loosening, you can check on it when ever you like by looking thru the dipstick hole. Really!

 

Cheers,

Steve