Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Whitecourt/Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Thanked 1,183 Times in 672 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Is this why the new (2nd gen) engines have a cartridge based filter instead of a spin-on filter? We've all heard of bad experiences involving cheap oil filters exploding under high oil pressures, so having only the filter element replaceable eliminates the chance of that happening since the assembly that holds the filter element is designed for re-use and is therefore built better. That way I can use my cheap $7 Fram filter, which is literally just paper and glue, without worrying about classic spin-on Fram quality problems with cardboard supports collapsing, strings, can edge crimp failures and bad flowback prevention and stuck bypass valves.
Also mounting it on the bottom probably means that oil drains INTO it, so that on startup there's already oil ready to go, whereas a top mounted filter would probably drain empty, and take a few seconds to 'recharge' with oil at startup.
Just thinking about this, because some guys like to complain about the fact that it's a cartridge AND on the bottom of the truck supposedly making oil changes difficult and I was thinking that there must be a reason for this (apart from 'ooh we're saving the environment'), since the filter is already connected by hoses (and not integrated INTO the engine itself) so technically it could have been placed anywhere. Just a thought.
2011 F-350 SD - SRW XLT FX4 CCLB: 6.7L PSD, 6R140, 3.55:1 EL, Job 2 / BDS 6" 4-Link, Fox 2.0, 38x13.50R18, 18x9 Fuel D525, H&S Gearhead MCC.
2015 RAM 3500 - SRW ST D28L92 4x4 CCLB: B6.7, G56, 3.42:1 / BDS 8" 4-link, 38x13.50R18, South Bend SDD3250, EFILive.