Tundra Air Filter Test

[nhparrot]

I have updated the results of the Tundra Air Filter Test with my latest oil analysis. See the results here > Tundra Air Filter Test

I would like to thank George Morrison STLE CLS , TundraSolutions member georgeseq, without whose assistance, advice, and expert knowledge this experiment would not have been possible.

I would like to thank AV Lubricants, Inc. for donating oil analysis kits used during these tests.

Final results of the Toyota OEM Paper Air Filter vs the TRD Performance Air Filter are in. Preliminary results of the Amsoil 2-Stage Foam Air Filter have been posted.

I would like to thank Fred Hubert, TundraSolutions.com Supporting Vendor RagerXS, of New England Synthetics for donating the AMSOIL Air Filter used in this test.

Last, but not least, I would like to thank TundraSolutions.com members Dude Boy, EZ2BME, MustangSally and userw5 for their help and assistance.

[SATundra]

Glenn, and all the others who participated or helped in the tests, EXCELLENT JOB. That makes some very good reading and is packed with usefull firsthand input and data. The results are very interesting as well. Very good job. Can't wait for the K&N results to be posted. keep us posted.

BTW maybe you should do more driving, that would speed up the test results.

SATundra

[Dave Smith]

>>>Based on a Toyota maintenance schedule of 30,000 miles between air filter replacements, the TRD Performance Air Filter becomes cost effective at 150,000 miles, and the Amsoil Foam Filter at 90,000 miles.<<<

Hmmm. I guess I'm a little dense...to me your results suggest the stock filter is the most effective of the three tested. How can the TRD or Amsoil filters ever become cost effective over the OEM based on filtration performance?

Great report!

-DS

[nhparrot]

I was not suggesting cost effectiveness against filtering efficiency - but comparing cost to cost alone. Also the preliminary results of the Amsoil filter indicate that it filters comparably to the OEM paper

[randyeverett]

Thanks for the update, Glenn-----------------Knowledge can be wonderful thing. After running K&N filters and filterchargers in my T-Bird and my brother doing same in his taco, AND both of us having sensor failures down-stream of filters over the years---------- with performance gains that are questionable, at best--------I think I'll stay with OEM in my Tundra.
Again, thanks.............
Everett

[Imdone]

When are the results for the K&N drop in filter going to be done????


Thanks for the Updated info and results are looking very interesting. Keep up the good work.

Thank you to all that have participated in this project. I have a K&N drop-in filter and am curious to know what the filtering is.

Again, thank you to all that have helped aquire this information.

[nhparrot]

I have 2k miles to finish up on the Amsoil Foam Filter then I will do the K&N. Based on my average miles, the final results and the end of the test will be around the end of December. 4 different filters, 37k miles +, 19 months.

[RagerXS]

Glenn has done excellent work here, all voluntarily, and we should all be thankful.

At a 30K mile interval, it's hard to compete with the OEM filter for cost-effectiveness. Traditionally, paper filters clog and performance suffers near the end of the maintenance interval -- switching at this time provides many individuals with a false sense of a performance improvement, but all they did was get back what they had, not get more than they had...

At a 15K mile intervals the cost-effectiveness of a re-useable aftermarket air filter comes into play. It's difficult to guage the lifespan of the OEM filter because everyone lives in different climates and varying dust conditions. But I can say that the Toyota Tundra OEM air filter is more of a depth type filter than standard paper filters, thus it should last longer without ill effects than the old air filters used to.

Finally, the special order AMSOIL S1996 air filter is being converted to a standard item. It will be TS-162, and the price is expected to drop a fair amount when this changeover is complete...

~ Fred

[blacktundra]

We need more members like you! No questions here!

[Joe]

I think your copper readings are mainly due to the copper core of your oil cooler - you should see a decrease in the cooper reading with every analysis you have done as the core becomes more heavily oxidized over time and usage.

[MMitsock]

First I’d like to say that I applaud nhparrot’s initiative in performing these tests, he shows he is interested in generating data that we can all use. However, I would like to point out a couple of things that bother me with the data (I’m not trying to be overly critical but my science and statistics background raise a few flags here).

1. There is only one data point (oil analysis for each filter). To get data that is reliable I think you would have to have at least 4-5 data points that could be averaged. Statistically the difference between 14, 11 and 9 may not be significant (see #3 below).

2. The filters are used at different times of the year. I know that during winter months here in New England (I live in MA) that a lot of sand (silica) is spread on the road. My air filter is clogged with it by May or June when the highway departments decide to get around to picking up the sand. If the oils sample was taken while the roads had sand on them I think you could expect to see an increase in silica regardless of the type of filter being used.

3. What is the accuracy of the tests? If the test number is say 11 PPM there has to be a “noise factor” contributed by the test equipment. A single reading of 11 PPM may be +/- 3 to 4 PPM due to equipment variation. Test data of this sort is usually presented with a number followed by the accuracy of the test represented by a +/- number. Without knowing the variation due to the equipment the reading of 14, 11 or 9 may be undistinguishable. In other words you could test the same oil one day and get a reading of 14 and then test it another day and get a reading of 10 and another day and get a reading of 18 if the variation of the equipment is +/- 4 PPM.

4.I’m not an expert here but I would think that it would be harder for silica to get into the oil from the combustion air on the top of the cylinder than if it was drawn in with the air through the crankcase ventilation system. Again, I don’t know how the crankcase ventilation system works but I think it attempts to vent the air above the oil in the sump into the air being used for combustion to burn vapors and reduce emissions from the crank case. If the ventilation system moves air out of the crankcase it must draw air in somehow. Are there filters on this air coming directly into the crankcase? If there is a lot of dust in the air from road sanding maybe this is being drawn directly into the crankcase and mixing with the oil.

Again, this is just some food for thought for the group. I’m certainly not trying to discourage anyone from gathering data that can help us maintain our trucks

[nhparrot]

MMitsock,
1 - valid point however impractical in a test of this type without multiple test vehicles. To get 4 or 5 test points for each filter, with reset between filters and using normal change intervals would require either 4 or 5 vehicles or 25 - 30k miles using each filter type.

2 - In this case tests done during the winter did not show elevated silicon levels, but in fact showed the opposite.

3 - Noted - All analysis's were conducted at the same lab so theoretically share the same degree of error. Although variations in different test equipment could be a wild card unknown.

4 - same as #2 in this case

I think you raise some good points. The bottom line is, it is personal choice on what air filter to use. However, you should evaluate the environment you will be driving in and your oil change intervals. Before changing to an aftermarket filter, have an oil sample analyzed, this analysis will be your baseline to use for comparison. After changing to an aftermarket filter, again have an oil sample analyzed and compare your results to your original baseline. With the results of the 2 analysis' you can evaluate if the aftermarket filter is providing the air filtration you want for your vehicle.

[MMitsock]

Glenn-

I think it's great you have taken the time, effort and expense to evaluate these filters. You're right, unless a whole bunch of people did the same type of test at the same time under similar conditions it would be nearly impossible to get a lot of data valid points.

Any data is more valuable than just listening to the claims of parts manufacturers and taking them on face value.

Mark

[Jpiper11]

Now that I am back to flying full time again.. I'm ALMOST to my next 10k mile oil change.

I'm anxious to confirm that my readings are a little better after changing my OEM air filter. I had slightly elevated silicon in the last test, due to the fact that i had 20k miles on the air filter. Per george... I have gone to a 15k interval on the filter.

We shall see. So far, I think it's quite easy to prove that running 10k intervals with synthetic is not hurting a thing.

JP

[nhparrot]

Just sent in the sample for the re-done Amsoil Filter test. Willbe posting the results as soon as the analysis is back. Next up - K&N Air Filter.