Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Whitecourt/Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Thanked 1,174 Times in 669 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 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-350SD - SRW XLT FX4 CCLB: 6.7L PSD, 6R140, 3.55:1 EL, Job 2 (Daily Driver)
With BDS 6" 4-Link & Rear Leafs, Fox 2.0 IFP, Toyo MT 38x13.50R18 on 18x9 Fuel D525, Bulletproof Prerunner Bumper, EGR/DPF/SCR delete.
1994 RAM 2500 - SLT Laramie 4x4 RCLB 5.9L 6BT NV4500 (Project)
2009 Tundra - SR5 4x2 RCLB 5.7L 4.30:1 (Sold)
Others: 1995 F-350HD DRW 4x2 CCFB 7.3L-T444E PSD // 2004 F-350SD SRW 4x4 CCLB 6.0L-VT365 PSD.