[georgeseq]

I just completed a real world test comparing the new Amsoil EaO 57 oil filter vs. our OEM oil filter. Ran the OEM filter 1550 miles and captured an engine oil sample and ran a particle count on that oil. Changed the filter (only, not oil) and installed an Amsoil EaO 57 oil filter and then ran 1550 miles, again, sampled, ran analysis..

Results:

OEM oil Filter Amsoil EaO Filter
>4 microns= 1817 particles/ML 128 particles/ML
>6 microns= 990 particles/ML 70 particles/ML
>14 microns = 168 particles/ML 12 particles/Ml
>25 microns = 34 particles/Ml 2 particles/ML
>50 microns = 3 particles/ML 0 particles/Ml

Thus the Eao yielded over a 93% reduction in particulates vs. the OEM oil filter... The ISO cleanliness levels were 18/17/15 for the OEM and 14/13/11 for the Amsoil EaO filter. From a lube engineer's perspective, if I can reduce the ISO cleanliness one or two numbers, I am very happy. To achieve a 4 reduction over a quality oil filter, incredible... The used oil from my Sequoia was cleaner than the oil that came out of the quarts I used to fill the engine!
My Sequoia has 160,000 miles on it, original owner/driver/ME.......
NOTE: I do not now nor ever have had any affiliation with Amsoil.. My paycheck is relative to several major oil brands, who make filter also, but nothing with the performance level of the EaO.....
Simply the best oil filter currently available, from my testing and experience, by a huge, huge margin.
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Regarding the EaO life extension and the seeming paradox.. It is simply paper vs. microglass. Filter paper manufacture being more black art than science, roughly 40% of a cellulose element ends up being completely blocked right out of the box. Thus flow and contaminant containment level is significantly reduced. In a manufactured microglass element, 100% of the filter flows and has dirt holding capacity. As a general rule a microglass element will last up to 4 times longer than a comparable sized paper element yet provide close to half the flow resistance.. i.e. flows MUCH easier, better and lasts considerably longer yet filters worlds better! A win/win situation with microglass, except of course, price of filter. But in terms of overall performance and total cost, again, win/win...

And how bitter a pill this is for me to write as I am associated with a major oil company's products along with other major lube manufacturers and presenting a competitors product data as the end all be all oil filter... But, it IS that good...
And, as always, the footnote that I am not, nor have I never been an Amsoil dist. No association, no affiliation...
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Re: which oil is best... Not gonna go there......
Only to say a Group IV or V full synthetic, XW-30 viscosity.. I *am* biased from my experience but the EaO filter is the first and only lubricant related component I have ever named by brand.. My affiliation is with several major oil companies and obviously no affiliation or real world experience with Amsoil lubricants. Amsoil does make quality products but the only Amsoil product I can comment is the Amsoil EaO oil filter... Sorry..

George Morrison, STLE CLS
Columbus, Ohio

 

[georgeseq]

Wow, it would seem from my analysis results with the EaO, your Sequoia engine should very likely last forever!! My results are with the miniscule sized EaO for our engine. With a larger EaO, I wonder what kind of particle counts that would return.... As I mentioned previously, my used engine oil is already cleaner than the oil I put IN the engine out of the bottle; yours would be even cleaner!
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Napa Gold would return about the same results as the OEM filter results I posted initially. Paper/cellulose are essentially 30 micron filters and cellulose/microglass blend elements are somewhat better (Napa Gold, Mobil 1, etc.) but nowhere near what a full microglass element is capable. Napa Gold, Mobil 1, etc. were the best of what they were but a new level of filtration is now available with the EaO..
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Regarding reversing the test procedure. Not gonna do it! No way am I going back to OEM oil filter! Test done! Both oils had achieved filtration "equilibrium" at the 1500 mile check.
The OEM oil filter had cleaner oil to start with than the Amsoil EaO filter (new engine oil with initial change), thus the EaO was at a slight disadvantage to begin with. Additionally, I captured a sample of the OEM filter oil at 10,000 miles and will do the same at 10,000 miles for the Amsoil EaO filter. Thus two 1500 mile checks and two 10,000 mile checks.
As they say, I am not going back to the country after the results of the EaO filter... Be my guest if you wish but my engine is very, very happy with the EaO filter.. No more OEM oil filters for me! (nor any other brand at this point)

George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Certainly cost vs. reward should enter the equation. There are those of us that simply want to "use the best" in our high cost vehicles. From a lube engineer's perspective, I have experienced again and again the long term benefits of "clean oil" vs. not so clean. And the price vs. overall cost scenario.

So, yes, for someone who wishes to use the lowest priced oil and filters, the Amsoil EaO oil filter is not for you..... Note, I did not say "lowest cost"...

For that person who wants to have the absolute best oil filter at a reasonable (to me) cost of around $12.00 and then use it for 10,000 mile drain intervals, then the EaO filter is *the* filter at this point in time. And no, the EaO filters are not as readily available as WalMart goods, so, again, definitely not for everyone.....
George Morrison, STLE CLS
(NOT an Amsoil dealer, never have been: no association whatever other than now using their oil filters)

 

[georgeseq]

Regarding the excellent comment "but isn't this experiment flawed from the start? It would seem to me that the majority of particulates, especially the larger ones, were in fact captured by the OEM filter, thus unfair advantage was given to the Amsoil filter. What are you thoughts on this position?"

What we are analyzing here is a dynamic system which is continually creating a full spectrum of wear and contamination particles. The OEM filter captured what it was able to capture from the system. However, the large particles are not "gone" forever from the system. They are constantly being created. So when I sampled the EaO, its spectrum of capture related what its affect on a system which is constantly creating the same levels of contaminants the Eao filter's performance is then directly relatable to the performance of the OEM filter.
In other words, from my many years of experience with working hydraulic and engine systems which constantly create a spectrum of wear metals and contaminants at a very predictable rate, the test (although I would not use the results to write a PhD paper!) confirm what was a recognized potential filtration efficiency with the full microglass EaO vs. the accepted performance of a paper element.
So normally I would not have even published the results but the one analysis did confirm accepted performance of each types of filter medium.
Again, good question......
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

Yes, and I very much like the "knee of the curve" at the 10 micron region in that when one starts to get *really* low on microns, (below 5 microns generally accepted) one can begin to filter VI improver. So, the 10 micron "knee" is excellent.
Some MIT type did an inside study for Detroit some years ago and the 10 to 30 micron particulate size was deemed "the killer" particulate range for diesel engines. And with our hydrodynamic lubrication, that size spectrum makes sense in terms of increasing wear rates.
So, I am quite happy with a pretty close to beta 200 (absolute) 10 micron oil filter.
George Morrison, STLE CLS
NOT an Amsoil dealer, no affiliation whatever..... Just an EaO user with Mobil 1 stamped on my forehead.....

 

[georgeseq]

One place I am rather partial to is index, primarily in that I get back results and we can then discuss. And I work there.. Hopefully no conflict of interest... The problem with oil analysis results is they can be a bunch of meaningless numbers and not easily interpreted. I review between 200 and 300 a day so the numbers begin to take on meaning. There are many other labs in the U.S., Amsoil being associated with one whose name escapes me at this moment.

More importantly is the sample capture procedure. A sterile four ounce sample bottle is included in the kit. Keep the top on until the last minute of capture. There are two ways of capturing a sample: either during an oil change or with a 'thief', a vacuum device specifically designed to obtain a sample through the dipstick with no mechanicals touching the engine oils.

If sampled during an oil change, we do NOT want the first oil out of the hole, nor the oil from the filter. We want to see what the engine is seeing, so a mid-stream sample is the name of the game. Remove the plug, let a quart or so flow out then stick the bottle into and out of the stream. Cap immediately and you now have a representative engine oil sample. Fill out the info, UPS or Fedex (never mail: takes forever!) and in a few days you will have an e-mail back with your results.
Which oil sample kit? The basic $16.00 is all one needs unless one is going to do particle counts as I did, then it is considerably more in that now a human being is involved in the process.

George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

We like to see single digit silicon with used oil analysis. My Sequoia with OEM Toyota air filter element has consistently yielded silicon (dirt) levels of 3 to 5 ppm. And correspondingly incredibly low wear metals as a result..
Oil sampling technique is critical: mid-stream sample of hot oil..
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[georgeseq]

From a lube engineer's perspective, there simply is no such thing as filtration "overkill" other than the addition of by-pass filtration which brings with it potential catastrophic results from oil line failures, engine failures, etc.. I am strictly speaking from a perfection standpoint and the Eao filter is higher priced but to have engine oil In the engine be cleaner than the oil out of the bottle; well, I can assure you that having pristine, clean engine oil constantly will have long term benefit on a total cost basis. The filter *can* be double changed. i.e. last twice as long as the normal oil changes... (I will not be doing it but some folks are)

As lubrication principle, the #1 cause of component wear is contamination. Minimal contamination, minimal wear, longer life. If maximum life of the engine/components is #1, then the EaO filter should be part of the equation.


IF longer life is of value to a Toyota owner.. If it is not, Napa, etc. would be a better choice along with the lowest cost engine oils.. It is that simple..
George Morrison, STLE CLS