Oil filter loosening info.

[Ryland3210]

I purchased a new UFI filter today. Cost me $26 and change. Ouch!

I set up a fixture to apply a force compressing the gaskets of the new UFI and new Purolator.

Here's what I found:

Under compression, the Purolator measured 6463 pounds per inch, while the UFI measured 6365.

Under relaxation, the Purolator measured 7180, while the UFI was at 7082.

I consider these differences insignificant.

 

An interesting difference is that the Purolator's gasket is held in place by peened over tabs pushing on the I.D. of the gasket, while the UFI had 6 triangular bumps on the O.D. of the gasket itself. As oil pressure is applied, the Purolator gasket will tend to expand uniformly to the outside of the filter's groove and stay there, whereas the UFI's gasket will adopt a wavy shape. This raises the possibility that the UFI gasket will move as pressure is increased and relax as it is decreased, unless the filter is screwed tight enough so friction will prevent that in spite of the oily surface.

 

Suppose the gasket does move. If it does, static friction on the gasket preventing the filter from unscrewing is reduced or eliminated while the gasket is in motion. Of course, that still leaves the friction of the thread, but experience shows that has not prevented these filters from loosening.

 

This new UFI filter had even less gasket proud of the can than the filter I reported on at the beginning of this thread. It measured 0.054", corresponding to 80.6% squeeze if it is screwed all the way to bottom out, whereas the Purolator gasket and groove depth both measured within 0.001 of the previous filter, and like the previous one, was 0.080" proud of the can.

 

Next, I'm going to pull the original UFI filter back out of the engine and having a look at how much the gasket has been deformed, if any, and to see if the UFI design has changed in the new one.

[Guest Gary Cheek]

Nice work, above and beyond the call! Isn't this guy due some kind of a medal for his efforts?

[TX REDNECK (R.I.P.)]

yep, he deserves sumpn' for paying $26 for a UFI filter

 

next time try these guys http://www.mgcycle.com/oil.html

[Guest Gary Cheek]

Sure he could have bought the filter cheaper. Cheaper filters work better too!

Need to get beyond the cost and down to the meaningful measurements

 

Maybe all UFI buyers deserve a citation! You can get better but you won't pay more..

[Ryland3210]

Today, I removed the UFI filter, which had about 300 miles on it, and compared its gasket and groove to the original UFI which came with the bike, and to both new and old purolators.

 

I discovered that the UFI design had changed from the date coded 16.01.03 filter which came with the bike and the date coded 29.08.05 I just purchased from the dealer two days ago.

The UFI groove width was increased from 0.200/0.190 to 0.210/0.200

The UFI groove depth was increased from 0.206 to 0.225

The '03 gasket cross section was 120% of the groove cross section

The '05 gasket cross section was 109% of the groove cross section

The '03 gasket had a uniform cross section all the way around.

The '05 gasket had 6 triangular bumps on the O.D.

Since both gaskets have larger cross sections than the grooves, they cannot be squeezed until the can bottoms out to reach the theoretical 80.6% squeeze available. In fact, the '03 used gasket had mushroomed out both in the I.D. and O.D. directions. This would still be a problem, although lesser, with the '05 at 109%.

 

In my opinion, although the '05 UFI has been improved over the '03 from the standpoint of not exceeding the groove capacity as much, it is still inconsistent with recognized good design principals. The '05 gasket width was less than the groove width, which is in the right direction, but the placement of bumps on the O.D. of the gasket to retain it in the groove would be better placed on the I.D., for reasons explained in the earlier post.

 

In comparison, the Purolator equivalent filter retains the gasket by peened over metal tabs on the I.D. of the gasket, without a groove retaining wall against the I.D., so mushrooming does not occur as the gasket is compressed. Therefore, the full 68% squeeze is available.

 

The mushrooming of the UFI gasket may account for the use of torque as the tightening method recommended by UFI, since tightening by the number of turns methods might result in wide variations in the amount of torque required caused by small dimensional variations in the filter can's stampings and gasket dimensions. Furthermore, since it is impossible to achieve even the theoretical maximum 80.6% squeeze without mushrooming, one has to tighten to the point of mushrooming the gasket to achieve reasonable squeeze percentages. I also maintain that the 10-12 newton meters (7.4 to 8.9 foot pounds) instruction on the UFI filter is hardly enough in my experience. For example, it takes much more than that to achieve the ¾ to 1 turn recommended by Purolator and other American makers, even though the gasket is not being mushroomed until it extrudes out between the groove walls and the block, as it does with the UFI.

 

Another advantage of the Purolator design is that the entire gasket acts as a spring under compression over its thickness, whereas the UFI mushroom "cap" is much shorter. Therefore, the force against the block will diminish much faster for every turn the filter loosens (about 4:1) for the UFI than the Purolator. This, and the low torque spec both may account for the problems with loosening filters. UFI has changed the design between '03 and '05, perhaps to try to solve these problems. I do not think they have gone far enough. The groove is still too small for the gasket, and in the case of the gasket's bumps, the wrong method to retain it was chosen.

 

Bottom line for me is that I'm sticking with the Purolator special order replacement at $13 for now. It's half the price and a better design. I feel I can tighten that with confidence the same way I have in the past countless times. I was able to reach about 9/10 of a turn on the Purolator using my usual ratchet with the correct filter socket for it. I stopped when I felt the torque was as high as I was comfortable with. Fram makes one also, on the shelf at $5.98 at the same local Advance Auto Parts store, but I have not looked at the gasket/groove design. When I get the chance, I'll saw them in half to see which has a better construction inside.

 

Anyone want my brand new UFI 2328700 $26 filter complete with the original box? It's available for shipping cost plus $3 for the gift wrap.

[dlaing]

Can you tell from the visual information in this photo if the Walmart SuperTech might resist mushrooming better?

It seems to me the gasket is embedded in nice channel.

Click here or on image for larger image, plus invites for penis enlargements and girls just dying to meet you I have to use a better image posting site.

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

yep, he deserves sumpn' for paying $26 for a UFI filter

 

next time try these guys http://www.mgcycle.com/oil.html

 

We don't even pay 26 bucks up here in the great white north!!

 

Good to hear from ya TX!!!!

[Guest ratchethack]

For Yours Truly, $26 USD worth of oil filters amounts to a new one in the bike plus a shelf stock of 12 ea. of the Champion Labs ST3614 filters.

 

Assuming a filter change every other oil change, changing oil every 3K miles, that's good f'er 78K miles before the next trip to Wally World.

 

(See my previously posted Grand Rationale here: http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?...st&p=105211 )

 

BAA, TJM, & YMMV.

[Guest ratchethack]

Today, I removed the UFI filter, which had about 300 miles on it, and compared its gasket and groove to the original UFI which came with the bike, and to both new and old purolators.

. . .

John, I just took a gander at the WG board, where your work on this has been linked. There has been some commentary on your analysis, some of which has been far from complimentary.

 

This kind of criticism absolutely amazes me. I put it in the same category with all the negative fallout that sprouted up here in the wake of the Great K&N air filter Imbroglio a year ago.

 

I have to ask myself how it's possible for anyone to be so obviously OFFENDED by this kind of sincerely motivated, and evidently well conducted analysis?? Even if someone doesn't agree with it, doesn't this kind of thing only provide value to anyone with a sincere interest in solving what has been identified as a very serious problem, however common or uncommon it may be??? There's at least credible enough concern that's fairly well documented by none other than one of the most qualified authorities on the subject on the planet???

 

The only explanation I can come up with for malicious feedback over this kind of thing is that it must represent some kind of an unknown personal threat to a select few.

 

To me, this behavior says a lot about the complainer. It in no way detracts from the value of the effort.

 

Thanks for your conscientious work. It appears to me that you very well might be on to something. Please keep it up, and don't be distracted or put off by the naysayers. IMHO this represents the highest kind of value to all Forum members that a Tech Forum can provide.

[Guest Gary Cheek]

Yep , It seems there is a bit of overlap in that there are people on this site AND that site who can only comment on the $26 filter. Perhaps the rest is over their heads or something?

Anyhow I too appreciate the effort and have no problem that perhaps as an expediancy he may have been willing to pay that amount. Another possible is the dealer got the wrong price. WHO CARES?

The data about the filter is the good stuff ,for those who can get past the minor issue.

 

After all my ranting about just tighten them properly I may have to eat those words if indeed the UFIs or any other filters have issues that cause them to back off. The real cause however would very likely be due to using the UFI torque spec rather than the 3/4 turn past contact that I use with Champion (AKA Wal-Mart and Mobil1 among others) filters. I still have no fear of a Champion filter or any other filter tightened with that method ever going loose. Timely filter changes, oiling not greasing the seal and proper tightening are the only conditions.

 

Time will tell and Rylands efforts help considerably.

 

 

BTW, I am the one who linked this stuff to the "dark side"

[Ryland3210]

Can you tell from the visual information in this photo if the Walmart SuperTech might resist mushrooming better?

It seems to me the gasket is embedded in nice channel.

 

 

I can't certain without seeing a cross section, but here are some guidelines that I consider safe and conservative:

 

If the gasket can be compressed to the point where the can bottoms out to the mating surface without the gasket mushrooming on its O.D., AND at that point is compressed to 70% of its original thickness or less, it probably will work fine.

[Ryland3210]

John, I just took a gander at the WG board, where your work on this has been linked. There has been some commentary on your analysis, some of which has been far from complimentary.

 

This kind of criticism absolutely amazes me. I put it in the same category with all the negative fallout that sprouted up here in the wake of the Great K&N air filter Imbroglio a year ago.

 

I have to ask myself how it's possible for anyone to be so obviously OFFENDED by this kind of sincerely motivated, and evidently well conducted analysis?? Even if someone doesn't agree with it, doesn't this kind of thing only provide value to anyone with a sincere interest in solving what has been identified as a very serious problem, however common or uncommon it may be??? There's at least credible enough concern that's fairly well documented by none other than one of the most qualified authorities on the subject on the planet???

 

The only explanation I can come up with for malicious feedback over this kind of thing is that it must represent some kind of an unknown personal threat to a select few.

 

To me, this behavior says a lot about the complainer. It in no way detracts from the value of the effort.

 

Thanks for your conscientious work. It appears to me that you very well might be on to something. Please keep it up, and don't be distracted or put off by the naysayers. IMHO this represents the highest kind of value to all Forum members that a Tech Forum can provide.

 

Thanks for the words of encouragement.

 

I have been a pioneer in the machine tool and computer industry several times over, and have been under attack more than once as a result. When one threatens the status quo with new technology or new knowledge that is inconsistent with deeply held beliefs, the more confident vested interests will quietly go to work to adapt or copy. Those that feel threatened by the change and are insecure in their ability to adapt, noisily go on the attack to discredit the source of the perceived threat.

 

There's an acronym for this negative approach to attempt to stall progress: FUD, or Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. In sales strategies, as it goes, if you know your offering is inferior, FUD the opposition.

 

I used to get really annoyed at unjust accusations, unfounded criticism, and negative attacks FUDing but never let it stop me. Long ago, I stopped getting annoyed when I figured out the motivation, and realized it comes from fear, weakness, or sometimes plain ignorance. To me, it's forgivable when it's out of desparation, rather than mean spirited. I was unaware of the link, but it reminds me that the destructive attacks aimed at me in the past usually were not made in my presence, with only one exception, which I quickly dispatched with the truth. In all the other cases, I heard of them from third parties after the fact, as is true in this case.

 

The joy of seeking knowledge and helping others solve problems are my objectives. When publishing information, I am as careful as possible to base my findings on accurate data. I got involved in this problem because I thought my 20 years of experience in designing 2,000+ horsepower, 10,000 psi hydraulic machinery right down to the O-Ring grooves to contain that pressure might be helpful. I was intrigued by the various theories and solutions to the problem, and learned a few things along the way.

 

Objective criticism based on good science is welcome, and I learn from that too. It makes the whole process more enjoyable for me, actually.

 

As far my decision to spend the $26 goes, I'll gladly spend more than that at the drop of a hat to gain some useful information. It's nothing compared to the time I have put into this project. I certainly wasn't going to risk providing anything less than thorough information to people who might depend on it, and provide the data behind the conclusions I reach. It's possible that some individuals may not read what I'm writing carefully. Even if they do, when cherished beliefs or one's livelihood are challenged, the emotional filters can kick in to effect and alter the perception of what's being stated.

[Ryland3210]

Yep , It seems there is a bit of overlap in that there are people on this site AND that site who can only comment on the $26 filter. Perhaps the rest is over their heads or something?

Anyhow I too appreciate the effort and have no problem that perhaps as an expediancy he may have been willing to pay that amount. Another possible is the dealer got the wrong price. WHO CARES?

The data about the filter is the good stuff ,for those who can get past the minor issue.

 

After all my ranting about just tighten them properly I may have to eat those words if indeed the UFIs or any other filters have issues that cause them to back off. The real cause however would very likely be due to using the UFI torque spec rather than the 3/4 turn past contact that I use with Champion (AKA Wal-Mart and Mobil1 among others) filters. I still have no fear of a Champion filter or any other filter tightened with that method ever going loose. Timely filter changes, oiling not greasing the seal and proper tightening are the only conditions.

 

Time will tell and Rylands efforts help considerably.

BTW, I am the one who linked this stuff to the "dark side"

 

Thanks, Gary.

 

I thought the $26 price was extraordinarily high. I asked the dealer to check the price. There was no mistake. From where I live, they are an hour from home, and by far the closest. It happens I was close to them for other reasons, they had it in stock, and I was interested in getting finished on the project. You're right on, expediency was the key. Besides, a one time outlay of $26 is small potatoes in the scheme of things. I didn't publish the dealer's name on purpose.

 

I have no problem with your linking it over. I'm sure the intentions were good. Who knows? Maybe some good will come out of it. If not, there's always entertainment value.

 

regards,

 

John

[Baldini]

...The joy of seeking knowledge and helping others solve problems are my objectives. When publishing information, I am as careful as possible to base my findings on accurate data. I got involved in this problem because I thought my 20 years of experience in designing 2,000+ horsepower, 10,000 psi hydraulic machinery right down to the O-Ring grooves to contain that pressure might be helpful. I was intrigued by the various theories and solutions to the problem, and learned a few things along the way....

 

...& good luck to you ! I haven't been much interested in this stuff (UFI always worked fine for me) but I just don't understand why people get so het up about you doing a bit of honest research in your own time - I mean how does it affect them in any negative way? They/we can't lose anything by your efforts but may gain. As I say - good luck to you Ryland3210

 

KB

[luhbo]

...

 

I used to get really annoyed at unjust accusations, unfounded criticism, and negative attacks FUDing but never let it stop me. Long ago, I stopped getting annoyed when I figured out the motivation, and realized it comes from fear, weakness, or sometimes plain ignorance. To me, it's forgivable when it's out of desparation, rather than mean spirited. I was unaware of the link, but it reminds me that the destructive attacks aimed at me in the past usually were not made in my presence, with only one exception, which I quickly dispatched with the truth. In all the other cases, I heard of them from third parties after the fact, as is true in this case.

 

....

 

 

Most helpfull this Guzzi science, indeed. Just think of what these tiny lovely Guzzis are able to cope with and to transport and your gonna start your next trip with a lot more confidence that all will go well than before.

 

Hubert